Proposed Response to FPDAM Part 1 BR-0001, et al

[Innovimax SARL]

Shawn,

You surely got your answer to your previous question here

Mohamed

On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Shawn Villaron <shawnv at microsoft.com> wrote:

> Why do we need to differentiate T vs 376:1?  I would assert that you don't,
> although I know that we all don't agree here.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) [mailto:eb2m-mrt at asahi-net.or.jp]
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 6:24 AM
> To: e-SC34-WG4 at ecma-international.org
> Subject: Re: Proposed Response to FPDAM Part 1 BR-0001, et al
>
> >
> > I'm still baffled why we're afraid to take a position here.  We're
> >willing to take lots of strong positions elsewhere.  Why are we scared
> >when it comes to "versioning?"
>
> MBs correctly pointed out our mechanism are not good enough for
> distuinguishing T and 1st edition Ecma 376.  They are right.  But we
> nevertheless did not provide any mechanisms.  We have to explain why.
>
> I think that the existence of other mechanisms for versioning and
> extensibility is a red herring.  After all, they do not help to distinguish
> T and 1st edition Ecma 376.
>
> Cheers,
> Makoto
>
>


-- 
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 9 52 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 €
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.vse.cz/pipermail/sc34wg4/attachments/20100204/4f260871/attachment.htm>