Some time back the WN group agreed that the existing guidance of avoiding 'backward compatibility' is outdated, and industry standards, RHT discussions (and some common sense) supports that.
That said, it is not a phrase to be used lightly. From the CSG:
Discuss backward compatibility with caution, as claims may promise future actions that are legally binding. Don't use "backwards compatibility." Example: "This solution will be backward compatible with at least 3 previous releases."
The current RHSG entry still says to avoid this phrase and to use 'compatible with earlier versions'. We need to update the entry to reflect the CSG.
Some time back the WN group agreed that the existing guidance of avoiding 'backward compatibility' is outdated, and industry standards, RHT discussions (and some common sense) supports that.
That said, it is not a phrase to be used lightly. From the CSG:
Discuss backward compatibility with caution, as claims may promise future actions that are legally binding. Don't use "backwards compatibility." Example: "This solution will be backward compatible with at least 3 previous releases."
The current RHSG entry still says to avoid this phrase and to use 'compatible with earlier versions'. We need to update the entry to reflect the CSG.