David Carver wrote:
> That is up to the implementors, and I suspect they could use the IRI
> support.
It's still not clear to me that the IRI support does anything but
explicitly require something that was possible before.
> The point being is that standards no matter how small and how much of
> niche serve their purpose, and they do need to be updated from time to
> time. Maybe it isn't fitting your use case or your particular interest,
> but I'm for one am glad to see the specs getting attention. If nothing
> else it brings them up to date with the needs now by some in the
> community that need them.
I guess that means we'll eventually be seeing updates of a wide variety
of specs that see relatively little use. That's not all bad. In the
case of XLink, though, it really highlighted for me that even a spec
that utterly failed to build a community is still sort of somehow
marching along.
Perhaps XPointer 1.1 is next.
--
Simon St.Laurent
http://simonstl.com/
