- From: Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:24:05 -0700
- To: Xiaoshu Wang <wangxiao@musc.edu>
- CC: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: Xiaoshu Wang [mailto:wangxiao@musc.edu] > Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 4:17 PM > Now, given one information, you are proposing three mechanisms to > specify it. Isn't it obvious that something is *fundamentally* wrong > about the proposal? No. That's like saying an HTML document should never repeat any of the links provided in the HTTP header, etc. The reality is that there isn't any single solution that satisfies all the use cases we have. After over a year of debating it, this combination of three methods is the best we have come up with, and it works fine. Is it a beautiful solution with clean architecture? No. But it is the only solution we can deploy today and expect people to use. If you read the proposal, it clearly goes through the list of available methods and states why this approach was chosen. EHL
Received on Thursday, 25 June 2009 23:24:54 UTC