[
Date Prev
][
Date Next
][
Thread Prev
][
Thread Next
][
Date Index
][
Thread Index
]
-1 on the features draft
To
: Atom Protocol <
atom-protocol@xxxxxxx
>
Subject
: -1 on the features draft
From
: Bill de hOra <
bill@xxxxxxxxxx
>
Date
: Sat, 15 Sep 2007 01:00:18 +0100
List-archive
: <
http://www.imc.org/atom-protocol/mail-archive/
>
List-id
: <atom-protocol.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe
: <
mailto:atom-protocol-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe
>
Sender
:
owner-atom-protocol@xxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent
: Thunderbird 1.5.0.13 (X11/20070824)
For the record.
Negotiation of features is non-trivial, and requires a formally
specified processing model, which is not supplied. I suggest the WG
(and the IETF) would be better off defining new status codes.
cheers Bill
Follow-Ups
:
RE: -1 on the features draft
From:
Joe Cheng
Prev by Date:
Re: -1 on the features draft
Next by Date:
RE: -1 on the features draft
Previous by thread:
Re: -1 on the features draft
Next by thread:
RE: -1 on the features draft
Index(es):
Date
Thread