Eric Scheid wrote:
On 18/1/08 3:20 AM, "James M Snell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One of the criticisms of that work was that while rfc4287 allowed the
atom:link element to have child elements, it was not clear how many
implementations would actually be able to do anything with them. Another
issue was whether implementations that could get to the extensions
actually would do anything with them.
that is pretty much par for the course for *any* extension though, right?
Sure, but if you can't find anyone that intends to use your extension (and
you need both clients and servers), you have to ask yourself why you're
bothering to design it in the first place.
Not that I'm saying that's the case for media extensions. I just don't think
you should underestimate the importance of the question: will anyone use
this?
Regards
James
