Tim Bray wrote:
On Oct 15, 2005, at 12:07 PM, James M Snell wrote:
(c) a boolean <significant>yes|no</draft>
I don't believe we had consensus on this yet
<co-chair-mode>Uh, right, I stand corrected. PaceInsignificantUpdate
is still in the queue; I wrote that Pace because I heard a bunch of
people saying "gotta have this" so I'd jumped ahead mentally and
assumed it accepted.</co-chair-mode>
<thinking-out-loud-mode>It does seem painfully obvious, based on the
language in the atom-format draft, that the protocol must include
*some* way to indicate whether an update is significant or not. The
mechanics don't seem that interesting.</thinking-out-loud-mode>
-Tim
agreed on both counts
