RSD ( was Re: draft-gregorio-07.html)

[Simon Fell <soap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu,  7 Aug 2003 15:22:53 -0400, in soap you wrote:

>
>> > Want to flatten the field again Joe? Pull the Introspection section 
>> > from the RFC, with a "To Be Decided" and then let's see where things stand.
>> 
>> I DO NOT CARE WHICH FORMAT IS USED.
>> 
>> Can I make that any clearer?
>
>> The wild accusations of a conspiracy aren't going to help
>> you make your case and are at least making me 
>> regret putting RSD in there to begin with.
>
>Nope, and I'm sure that haven't said anything about a conspiracy... never mind wild accusations of one. And I think I went out of my way, not to imply that you cared, and that you've been reasonable.
>
>And BTW, I've almost stopped caring myself, except that I'm going to have to reimplement stuff if RSD is not chosen and my users want support for Atom... so if I just ignore it, I get to spend money re-implementing with no functional gain. Joy.
>
>> Can we please have a show of hands on what people prefer, either RSD or 
>> Introspection, and the next rev of the spec will reflect that vote. 
>> I will only  go with feedback that is "on the record", ie on the mailing
>> list or on the wiki.
>
>Shame this didn't happen in the first place. If someone can make a technical case I'm all ears. And as Joe knows, I've been completely open to ideas about shifting the RSD to spec from me to wherever the community desires.
>
>Now how about some tech talk? Explain to me why I should reimplement please?
>
>Thanks,
>
>d.

Is there an example on the wiki (or elsewhere for that matter) that
shows an RSD file containing all the data that's in the introspection
file ? Is it possible to hold the introspection info without an
extension to RSD ?

Cheers
Simon
www.pocketsoap.com