Luke said:
Consensus *appears* to be leaning towards keeping pub:control
and pub:draft.
I think some may be coming around on draft. A
little more discussion may prove fruitful.
Control is misleading cruft but no one seems to
care. :(
Heh.. ok, how about "Consensus *appears* to be leaning towards debating
this some more" ;-) ;-)
Error response
* I am proposing refinements to the existing Success/Failure text
and hoping to stimulate more discussion about error response
requirements
* http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceBetterHttpResponseCode
(snell)
Rob has a draft with an hError format that I think
we should look at.
Yep, and I've also seen suggestions for using atom:entry for error
responses. It would be great if we could get some Pace's submitted for
this. I honestly do not care what format is used so long as I can
extract a human readable description of the error from it.
* Luke Arno wants to use XHTML for Introspection. Last we heard,
a new version of the pace was in development.
* http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceXHTMLIntrospection2
(arno)
I have withdrawn this. Half way through creating a new
Ok. The wiki page does not appear to indicate the Withdrawn status.
Invalid Atom / atom:id handling
* To avoid posting syntactically invalid Atom, Luke is suggesting the
use of a dummy atom:id used to signal the server to create a new
atom:id
* http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceMagicId (arno)
I withdrew this. This was put up for discussion and
Ah, missed that on the wiki page. Sorry about that.
- James
