Hello all,
On 24/06/2008 12:16, Norman Gray wrote:
> In fact the document is self-contradictory, since it says in section
> 5, "The version numbering scheme for [...] Recommendations follows the
> same pattern[...], beginning with version 1.0: '1.0 // first formal
> release of the document at this level", but then almost immediately
> says "PR V2.1 becomes REC V2.1".
I don't see any contradiction, as long as all the text is included: "The
version numbering scheme for formal Working Drafts, Proposed
Recommendations, and Recommendations follows the same pattern as shown
above, beginning with version 1.0: '1.0 // first formal release of the
document at this level"
That being said, I'd agree that "PR V2.1 becomes REC V2.1" is confusing, although its meaning is well intended: the content of the document remains the same, it's only thes maturity status that changes. Hence I second your proposal of including the maturity status in the version number, making it something like "PR-2.1" and "REC-2.1". But I don't support the "PR-20080301" version number, mostly because it breaks all the existing document numbers.
Bruno Received on 2008-06-24Z17:23:42