[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: versioning of introspection documents and backwards/forwards compatibility


Joe Gregorio wrote:


On 6/6/06, Michael Wechner <michael.wechner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Hi

I guess one could consider the introspection document as
a published API. From the most recent draft (0.8) it is not clear to me
if an introspection document has a version (7.1 Example) or how else
will backwards/forwards compatibility handled in the case of the
introspection?


Do we need verbage like that of Section 6.2 in the Format spec?
I think it definitely needs something describing how the namespace is being used to version the spec and I think to better indicate this it would make sense to 
add a version number already to the Atom namespace.
Another thought re forward compatibility would be that the client could send its supported versions within the HTTP header to the server when asking for the introspection file or other stuff.
This way one would give the server a chance to to act as good as it can, whereas I am not sure if this is already part of the spec, because I couldn't find anything about this within the spec. 

Thanks

Michi


""   The Atom namespace is reserved for future forward-compatible
  revisions of Atom.  Future versions of this specification could add
  new elements and attributes to the Atom markup vocabulary.  Software
  written to conform to this version of the specification will not be
  able to process such markup correctly and, in fact, will not be able
  to distinguish it from markup error.  For the purposes of this
  discussion, unrecognized markup from the Atom vocabulary will be
  considered "foreign markup".
""

  -joe




--
Michael Wechner
Wyona      -   Open Source Content Management   -    Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com                      http://lenya.apache.org
michael.wechner@xxxxxxxxx                        michi@xxxxxxxxxx
+41 44 272 91 61