Deprecated Library Functions / Methods

[Walter Bright]

On 12/2/2012 11:52 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> We _were_ looking at outright throwing std.xml away at one point and then
> replacing it later, given how bad it is, but we never quite did that, and at
> this point, I wouldn't expect it to happen. We've been focusing more on
> avoiding breaking code of late, and so, doing something like that probably
> wouldn't be deemed acceptable at this point.

For this case (and others like it) I strongly suggest putting the revamp 
in something called std.xml2, and keep std.xml, but let std.xml wither 
and die away of its own accord rather than killing it.

For example, after a while it can be removed from the web site 
documentation.