Re: [xbiblio-devel] versioning strategy?

[Rintze Z. <rin...@gm...>]

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 12:16 PM, Bruce D'Arcus <bd...@gm...> wrote:

> But what IS a "backward incompatible" change, and why is OK that we
> don't define it?
>
> I'm asking this for the future, of course. E.g. someone adds an issue
> to the tracker: how do we distinguish whether it's targeted for 1.1 or
> 1.0.2?


If all styles that validate against the old version of the schema would also
validate against the new version, the schema changes between the two
versions would be backwards compatible, and would qualify for e.g. a 1.0.x
release. This would be the case for new variables, terms, types, optional
attributes and optional elements.

Rintze