> #2 and #3 look similar but act differently. Unfixable by about 16 > years. Fine.
On that thought -- how do people feel about describing a mechanism for extending TAP now, while there's only one large consumer of it, rather than later, when there are (hopefully) going to be multiple disparate users? As well as 'ok', 'not ok', and '\d...\d+' being meaningful, should we add something like 'version' (or 'ver')? If it's omitted in the output then 1.0 is assumed, which is whatever we have now. Future additions or changes get flagged with a new version number. So: 1..3 ver 1.1 ok 1 - Frobbed foo skip 2 - Skipped, using new skip syntax todo 3 - Todo, using new todo syntax should it ever be decided that putting 'skip' and 'todo' markers after a character that has had at least 25 years of being treated as a comment marker is not necessarily a good idea... N
