From: Peter Kirk (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Mar 02 2005 - 17:04:00 CST
On 02/03/2005 20:34, Asmus Freytag wrote:
> It's time to bring a bit more systematic treatment to the
> discussion of stability. Here's a rundown:
Thank you, Asmus and also Ken, for your helpful explanations.
So, as I see it, variation selectors are not as useful as I had
suggested. But the only way you can rescue stability is by legalising
alternative (and not canonically equivalent) representations of the same
data. I can see that in practice that may be what has to be done. But I
find it hard to reconcile with the whole concept of a standard which is
supposed to specify how text should be represented, as well as with Doug
Ewell's definition of stability that "it does not change in a way that
causes existing implementations or data to break".
-- Peter Kirk email@example.com (personal) firstname.lastname@example.org (work) http://www.qaya.org/ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.5.7 - Release Date: 01/03/2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Mar 02 2005 - 17:05:36 CST