...is Atom: http://code.google.com/apis/gdata/calendar.html
Interesting that Google is leveraging Atom extensively in the GData
generic read/write protocols.
The supported authentication scheme is also interesting.
Returning from the beyond to cast a vote.
James M Snell wrote:
a. Status quo. Leave things the way they are in the current draft
+1
b. Drop thr:count and thr:when from the spec.
-1
I have yet to hear personally an argument compelling to me to believe
why these elements should be
James M Snell wrote:
Maybe, but given that WG messed up in not making the link element
formally extensible, it's not likely to be pretty.
Nice one.
a. Status quo. Leave things the way they are in the current draft.
-1.
James M Snell wrote:
None of the implementors I'm aware of are
* James M Snell [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-04-13 09:05]:
Maybe, but given that WG messed up in not making the link
element formally extensible, it's not likely to be pretty.
Yes. WGs mess up. It’s just life. In a perfect world, this would
be different, but Atom took long enough to ship. What we
grumble ... I'm not really happy with it but this would work.
To be absolutely honest, David's comments here [1] really got me
thinking. It's definitely worth a read and alone was sufficient to sway
me on this. I don't like it; the use of the supplemental element is
ugly, but it's better than
* James M Snell [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-04-22 03:05]:
grumble ... I'm not really happy with it but this would work.
That’s roughly how I feel about it. :-)
It has in fact been the theme all throughout the Thread extension
development discussion…
To be absolutely honest, David's comments here
On 22/4/06 10:53 AM, James M Snell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where that gets nasty, of course, is when the href
is relative and xml:base is being used to set the Base URI. Publisher
would need to make sure that the href/ref combo match up properly
Would this be considered a match?
link
The feedvalidator really does need a ValidButPositivelyIdiotic warning.
- James
Eric Scheid wrote:
On 22/4/06 10:53 AM, James M Snell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where that gets nasty, of course, is when the href
is relative and xml:base is being used to set the Base URI. Publisher
would
