wrote:
> I think the key question here is: are the changes sufficiently small and
> uninteresting that merely changing the "edition" number is appropriate, or
> would it better serve users to use a more easily distinguished label? My
> current personal leaning (and again, not necessarily IBM's), is that this
> change is big enough to merit a more visibly distinct name. I suspect
> that very few users of XML can tell you which edition of XML they're
> using, until now very few have had need to care, and in fact I suspect
> very few know that there is such a thing as an "edition".
>
I'd be in favor of calling it XML 1.05.
There's big political barriers to calling it XML 1.1 (we have a failed
specification that already carries that label), and it does less than
XML 1.1 (thankfully).
Jonathan
