>From comment #10 by mzsanford: "The fix is the next API. In the mean time I'm going to remove the elements to prevent confusion."
They've been intentionally baleeted. -Chad On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Dossy Shiobara <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 4/2/09 5:34 PM, Chad Etzel wrote: >> >> Is there really someone who hasn't heard of Issue 214, yet? >> >> http://code.google.com/p/twitter-api/issues/detail?id=214 > > I don't know if anyone's reviewed issue #214, but the Search API's Atom > response doesn't even include a from_user_id node in the response. > > I guess issue #414 is a kind of dupe of #214 at this point. Thanks. > > -- > Dossy Shiobara | [email protected] | http://dossy.org/ > Panoptic Computer Network | http://panoptic.com/ > "He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own > folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70) >
