On 13 Jan 2005, at 9:56 pm, Antone Roundy wrote:
3. We don't need itThat's #1 above
#1 is dependent on there not being prior art. Even if there were, we still wouldn't need it.
and it won't be implemented anywhereGiven the utter simplicity of implementation, I think it will be implemented in many clients.
What's the value in implementing it? Yes its simple, but it means x% of feeds will now fail in my client, and I will get x% more complaints. What's the benefit to users?
What I'll be doing in Shrook if we have this, is ignoring extensions I know of but don't implement (and know that not supporting them does damage), and in all other cases processing the document.
and it's extremely open to abuseCould you explain?
I'm imagining someone thinking (or just deciding) they need to put all the extensions they use in mustUnderstand, whether they must be understood or not. If more than a couple of these feeds like this show up then clients will just give up paying any attention to mU.
If they report that they can't process it, the complaints will be along the lines of "I need to access this feed! Please add support (or I'll get a new feed reader)!" If they ignore it, the complaints will be "This feed doesn't show up properly! Fix it (or I'll get a new feed reader)!".
Exactly, the feed not working properly will be obvious to the user whether it matters or not.
and it's extremely open to failure.Could you explain?
Most obviously, typos, incorrect implementations, poor testing etc. All parts of atom are susceptible to this, of course, but mU just creates another potential point of failure, and with no hope of recovery, since the processor must discard the whole document.
The main problem ince a possibly large percentage won't implement it, using mustUnderstand in a feed doesn't prevent whatever dire consequences there might be of ignoring the elements that must be understood, which makes the proposed system unable to serve its purpose.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
