Re: random thoughts on DEPRECATED and OBSOLETE
From: Robert P. J. Day
Date: Sun Apr 29 2007 - 02:35:46 EST
On Sun, 29 Apr 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:
> Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > i think this online definition matches what i have in mind:
> > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=GGGL,GGGL:2006-10,GGGL:en&defl=en&q=define:Deprecated&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title
> "Definitions of Deprecated on the Web: [...] This term is used to refer
> to /obsolete/ structures that should not be used for new applications".
> Emphasis is mine.
> I can agree with this and the other definitions at this search result.
you're conflating those two again. here's my last attempt -- see the
and note the fundamental distinction:
deprecated: "... User agents should continue to support deprecated
elements for reasons of backward compatibility..."
obsolete: "... no guarantee of support by a user agent."
that's it -- there's the fundamental difference. i really don't
care if you can find other wordings that you can interpret
differently. in *my* proposal, those two definitions are not
orthogonal, they are mutually exclusive. period. end of discussion.
if you can't accept that, feel free to submit your own proposal.
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/