On 10/26/05, James M Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Robert Sayre wrote: > > >On 10/26/05, James M Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >>Interesting, the exact argument could have been applied to ... > >> > >> > > > >draft-snell-atompub-crapflood? > > > > > > > Tell you what, rather than breaking down into personal attacks and > further incorrect assumptions about what specs I have or have not read > or what code I have or have not implemented, perhaps you could answer my > original question: why is it necessary for us to support collection > nesting? You've said that your approach doesn't require that folks use > nesting but your approach would require implementors to support it just > in case folks actually do want to do it. Why should I, as an > implementor, support collection nesting when it's already been > demonstrated that the problem of collection grouping can be handled > without nesting? >
What is the argument for forbidding "nesting"? - Luke
