- From: Eric J. Bowman <eric@bisonsystems.net>
- Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 20:24:04 -0700
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Cc: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
Larry Masinter wrote: > > For "+json" to be useful for anything, it has to mean something that > everyone agrees to it meaning... and the only way we have of getting > that agreement is to publish a document and put it through a > consensus process (notwithstanding those who prefer the" willful > violation" path). > Sure. But first, the groundwork for such an effort must be laid, such that it applies to +anything. I'm talking about defining extensions in the registry, not +json per se. What's the counter-argument here, in favor of leaving extensions undefined? -Eric
Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2011 03:24:55 UTC