[ticker-dev] Timeout attribute

[Phillips, Matthew]

[David]
"
If we could change the field name, and consequently keep the version
number at 3000, that might be a compromise I'd be interested in,
although it seems like some additional complexity in the apps?

  Ian> Perhaps we should take this as a lesson that in future we
  Ian> shouldn't have clients implemementing a draft claim to
  Ian> implement the final standard? Although with a purely numeric
  Ian> version that might get a bit ugly.

I think the biggest lesson is "don't let draft protocols drag out for
3 years"  :-/

But, more concretely, i think you're right -- having draft protocols
using the final spec version number is asking for trouble.

I can't think of a simple solution though .. 2999 seems a bit broken.
Why do we have 1000 micro versions again?

Maybe 3.0final should be 3010 ?
"

It's a bit arbitrary either way: there doesn't seem much reason to prefer 3010 over 3100 for example. If the original idea was that major numbers => complete incompatibility =>, minor => backwards compatibility, then technically this change should make the version 4000 - but I don't even want to think about going there :/ I'm happy with any combination, but 3001 seems the "least illogical" ;)

Matt.