What I want to avoid is a "well, this template feature was introduced in 5.3, so let me hunt around the web site looking for the right version number of the DTD that matches". To me, it's a no brainer: you use a 5.3 feature, you need to use the 5.3 DTD.
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Kalle Korhonen <[email protected] > wrote: > Personally, I'd just live with the minor confusion it causes. A > reasonable argument for resisting introducing 5.2 DTD that'd be > identical to 5.1 DTD is that if a DTD issue needs to be fixed or T5.2 > for one reason or another still introduces a minor tweak to the DTD, > the 5.2 DTD would have already been used. You could of course also > argue that if a DTD issue needs to fixed, it always implies a new > minor revision, but I prefer practicality over rules set in stone. > > Kalle > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Howard Lewis Ship <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Certainly, it should have been versioned 5.1 (not 5.1.0). There was a > stage > > where we were trying different things with version numbers. > > > > However, I think (ultimately) it is very nice to have the version number > of > > the DTD track the Tapestry version it was introduced in. > > > > I'm still thinking whether it is good to have a 5.2 DTD that it identical > to > > the 5.1 (i.e. 5.1.0) DTD. Certainly, if we introduce new template > features > > in 5.3 the DTD version will be 5.3. > > > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> For what it is worth, this caused me some confused. If the TML > >> version was something like 1.1 then it would seem independent. > >> However, it is so close to the version of Tapestry that using TML > >> 5.1.0 when you are using Tapestry 5.2.4 looks like something is out of > >> sync. > >> > >> Mark > >> > >> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Igor Drobiazko < > [email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > I would see 5.1.0 as version of TML and not of Tapestry. Not > necessarily > >> > every Tapestry version brings new template features. Having a > 5.2.0.xsd > >> > without any new features feels strange. > >> > > >> > On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Alex Kotchnev <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> >> It would seem that now that T 5.2 is officially released the official > >> >> version of the xsd in templates would be bumped to 5.2.0 . However, > >> >> switching the template version to tapestry_5_2_0.xsd breaks > templates. > >> This > >> >> behavior is somewhat confusing and inconsistent - even if 5_2_0 has > no > >> >> significant changes it should at least be possible to use it in the > >> >> template > >> >> declaration. > >> >> > >> >> All examples in the documentation use tapestry_5_0_0.xsd > >> >> or tapestry_5_1_0.xsd. > >> >> > >> >> Regards, > >> >> > >> >> ALex K > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Best regards, > >> > > >> > Igor Drobiazko > >> > http://tapestry5.de > >> > > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > Howard M. Lewis Ship > > > > Creator of Apache Tapestry > > > > The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to > learn > > how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast! > > > > (971) 678-5210 > > http://howardlewisship.com > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > -- Howard M. Lewis Ship Creator of Apache Tapestry The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast! (971) 678-5210 http://howardlewisship.com
