On 5/16/06, James M Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A few of the individuals on the WG had a problem with the placement of the attributes due to various limitations of a few existing Atom 1.0 implementations.
Right, and you're breaking them because...? You haven't coherently explained your reason for moving them back. After all, you agreed with the WG and updated the document, but now you've moved them back for unexplained reasons and pointed at deployments.
None of the folks I know of that have actually implemented support for the extension has had any problems with them.
I find your answers most unsatisfying and full of circular reasoning that serves mostly to dance around the fact that you and a few others have already deployed. That's been your argument for months now, and the IETF process has a way to deal with that situation: Informational. -- Robert Sayre
