SCS-1.1 internal draft available

[Walter Landry]

Markus Demleitner <msdemlei at ari.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 11:50:57AM -0700, Walter Landry wrote:
>> * A solution to move to UCD1+ would be nice, but it should probably be
>>   postponed to a major revision.
>> 
>> Is it worth doing if we do not have UCD1+?  That and allowing updated
>> VOTable versions are the two main issues for me.
> 
> Oh, SCS is painful in so many minor ways that cleaning it up to the
> extent that's possible without breaking clients is absolutely
> worthwhile.  Also, you can of course already use UCD1+ for everything
> but the identifier and the main position, and most services do that.

I am confused.  Allowing VOTable > 1.0 will break old clients, and
that is already in the proposed spec.  Is the update allowed to break
old clients or not?

Cheers,
Walter Landry