On Feb 6, 2005, at 6:50 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
On Feb 5, 2005, at 6:01 PM, Roy T.Fielding wrote:
The problem with that statement (about HTTP) is that absence of a
must-understand in HTTP is not one of its big problems. Yes, I know
lots of people have talked about it as a limiting factor in
James M Snell wrote:
My challenge with the idea of mustUnderstand in Atom is in trying to
figure out how the heck it would realistically be used for anything
worthwhile. Take blog content for instance, if my blog reader accesses
a feed that contains an entry with a mustUnderstand metadata element
On Feb 5, 2005, at 6:26 AM, Joe Gregorio wrote:
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 20:25:50 -0800, Mark Nottingham [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
My preference would be something like
This specification assigns no significance to the order of atom:entry
elements within an Atom Feed Document. Atom Processors MAY
On Feb 5, 2005, at 9:48 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
What does that mean? SOAP is a Must Ignore format, but it also has a
way of saying that you have to understand a particular extension; as I
said before, this is one of the big problems with HTTP. mustUnderstand
should be used sparingly, but
On Feb 5, 2005, at 9:48 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
What does that mean? SOAP is a Must Ignore format, but it also has a
way of saying that you have to understand a particular extension; as I
said before, this is one of the big problems with HTTP. mustUnderstand
should be used sparingly, but
