It'll be OS 11. Why?
Thus, meaning that Apple will most likely omit 10.10, as it ends in a zero, and because Apple has already released a 10.1 (remember 10.10 would be "10.1" according to Apple's naming convention) the next logical step is to move onto OS 11. I think that Mavericks was supposed to be OS 11, but because iOS 7 needed more attention, they decided to delay the redesign, but kept with the name change.
Don't tell me about how the logs say Apple is testing 10.10. Apple can easily fake version numbers to hide version they're actually testing. After all, Apple wouldn't want traffic tracking software to reveal OS 11 before it's reveal.
Wow, you've really managed to misunderstand the article you quoted!
...the convention is to omit any parts after the minor version whose value are zero.
There are three parts: the major version, the minor version, and the "revision" or bug fix version. For example, on the current version of iOS (7.1.1), we have major version 7, minor version 1, revision 1.
All this quote says, is that if the number
after the minor version is
equal to zero (NOT "ends in zero"), then that zero is not included in the version number.
The result of applying this is that we have version 7.1, then 7.1.1, but there was never a 7.1.0.
Before that, there was 7.0, then 7.0.1, but there was never a 7.0.0.
When Mavericks came out, is was version 10.9, not version 10.9.0, because if the third number is a zero it's left off.
Do you get it now? It has nothing to do with ending in a zero. And the quote you quoted is nothing new, as you can see it's been in place all along. We're going to get OS X version 10.10 next. There is zero doubt about this.
