* Ruslan N. Marchenko <[email protected]> [2017-02-13 19:30]:
> >As there was no consensus two years ago, I just added both elements to
> >0280 in https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/382
>
> Thanks for clarification, but then still, why two? if <private/> is still
> required to avoid bump, why not to stick to that? Especially if, as it was
> pointed out in referenced thread - they have different semantic, but XEP
> expects them to provide same outcome within specification/implementation.

As I wrote earlier, the discussion did not lead to a consensus. Adding
both was an attempt to get it moving again, or at least to create a
state with the widest possible compatibility.

My personal stance would be: discard <private/>, reference 334, be done
with it. However, that would probably require a namespace bump.


Georg
-- 
|| http://op-co.de ++  GCS d--(++) s: a C+++ UL+++ !P L+++ !E W+++ N  ++
|| gpg: 0x962FD2DE ||  o? K- w---() O M V? PS+ PE-- Y++ PGP+ t+ 5 R+  ||
|| Ge0rG: euIRCnet ||  X(+++) tv+ b+(++) DI+++ D- G e++++ h- r++ y?   ||
++ IRCnet OFTC OPN ||_________________________________________________||

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
Unsubscribe: [email protected]
_______________________________________________

Reply via email to