Just wanted to follow through on this for everyone. Given that there
are vendors getting ready to ship code based on the current rev of the
spec, I'm *not* going to rename the id attribute to ref. Yes, I
know that id is confusing to some folks, but we're just talking the
name of a single
Friday, March 24, 2006, 3:28:02 AM, James Snell wrote:
I believe the concern is over the thr:count and thr:when attributes for
the replies link relation, both of which are optional, and both of which
provide what I consider to be extra information. In other words, it's
ok if an
David Powell wrote:
Friday, March 24, 2006, 3:28:02 AM, James Snell wrote:
I believe the concern is over the thr:count and thr:when attributes for
the replies link relation, both of which are optional, and both of which
provide what I consider to be extra information. In other words, it's
For me it's a matter of the fact that the spec has gone through 6
revisions and two design overhauls since it was first pitched. It's
been out there for quite a while. At some point, the design discussions
need to end and it needs to stablize so that folks can do something real
with it. If,
Sylvain Hellegouarch wrote:
Hi James,
For me it's a matter of the fact that the spec has gone through 6
revisions and two design overhauls since it was first pitched. It's
been out there for quite a while. At some point, the design discussions
need to end and it needs to stablize so
Oh, and I forgot to say that the folks who have already commented in
favor of the id-to-ref rename already have their votes counted ;-)
And yes, Dave, I'm counting your comments regarding #2 as a +1..
- James
James M Snell wrote:
[snip]
So, with that, let me go ahead and open it up to a vote
James M Snell wrote:
1. Do I change in-reply-to id=... / to in-reply-to ref=... / ?
I don't know enough to care what you call those attributes. And it's a long
way before we'll go live with anything so if you need to change attribute
names it wouldn't bother me in the least.
2. Do I
