Glen Daniels wrote: >I'm sorry, but I don't understand this whole "may ignore them" business. >What exactly is a processor going to do with an extension it doesn't >understand? IMHO, it has to ignore them unless they are marked as >required, in which case it fails. > It *can* give an option to a user of the tool to decide if it should go ahead ignoring the extensions it did not understand even if they are optional extensions or minimally issue a warning message (as a configurable option say). Blindly ignoring and staying silent on the user is the worst thing a tool can do to a user. I may want to build a client that understands certain optional extensions I need to use. If the tool does not handle some of the extensions, I as a programmer may like to have an option to override and plug in my code as needed or at least be notified. That way I can decide to buy tool-A that does not understand all the extensions vs Tool-B that does. May be some tool builders :-D would not like that. Just putting forth a pragmatic perspective for discussion. Grab some cool-aid will you!!! > I think this is common sense, but it >wouldn't hurt to specify it either. > Common sense tells me not to blow my top off silly also :) > >--Glen > > >Received on Tuesday, 27 January 2004 14:15:07 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:28 GMT