James M Snell wrote:
Bill de hOra wrote:
[snip]
[cc'd to the AD]
I see this as a worst practice, and the rationale above as paper thin.
Frankly, I'm unable to conclude this is treating the spec's versioning
policy as anything other than a loophole.
Please explain why the tombstone markup has been placed in the Atom
The reasons are simple:
1. This is a generic capability that is applicable to a broad range of
application cases. That is, it is not application or implementation
specific.
That's quite an assertion; I'll assume you can back it up.
2. Implementors are already starting to face issues with supporting a
broad and growing number of extension namespaces.
What issues are those? Seriously, I'd like to know.
cheers
Bill
