[UR-WG] LAST CALL - Usage Record Format Recommendation - Version 1

[Christopher Baumbauer]

Gilbert, Donal, and Rosario:

I apologize for the somewhat dated reply.  This particular issue was
resolved last month when we modified the document to bring it into
compliance with GFD.58 which deals specifically with creating a
standardized xml namespace, and in particular with versioning based on
the year and month of the publication for the specification.

I hopes this helps.

Cheers,
Chris

On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 09:54:24AM +0100, Donal K. Fellows wrote:
> Gilbert Netzer wrote:
> > So to sum up I think that the XML namespace could be used to mark the 
> > version of a UR.
> 
> I agree. The point isn't that the namespace changes as such. Instead,
> the qualified name of the outermost element changes, and it is that
> which makes the records completely distinguishable. Version attributes
> are only useful in those cases where the content is changing in some way
> that isn't covered by existing extensibility, but the outer tag with the
> version number is *not* changing, and their usefulness is because they
> allow early rejection of the document (or backend parser adjustment so
> that the doc can be parsed smoothly).
> 
> Donal.
> --
>   ur-wg mailing list
>   ur-wg at ogf.org
>   http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ur-wg

-- 
Christopher A. Baumbauer <cab at sdsc.edu>
Advanced System Software Developer
San Diego Supercomputer Center
Phone: 858.431.9983

"Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own
 government."
	-Thomas Jefferson