From: mort (manuel@netbustion.com)
Date: Sun Sep 08 2002 - 11:33:54 BST
On Sat, 2002-09-07 at 21:21, Simon Willison wrote:
> Whatever we decide on eventually, I think it's important that we explore
> any ideas or suggestions that we have now to their full extent. While
> PingBack is still small we have the flexibility to take it in pretty much
> any direction we want to, but once it starts to take off we will find it
> much harder to implement any new ideas.
Like i said before, i think the use of "levels" or "flavors" of the
pingback spec could be useful.
The current spec could be level 0 and every pingback implementation must
comply with it. A more advanced and complex spec could be level 1, and
must comply with its spec *and* with the level 0 spec. Same for level
2,etc... Just like an onion :)
The levels could be code named, rather than numbered to avoid the
thought that highest numbers = better.
What would be the disadvantages of this approach?
Message sent over the Blogite mailing list.
Archives: http://www.aquarionics.com/misc/archives/blogite/
Instructions: http://www.aquarionics.com/misc/blogite/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Sep 09 2002 - 05:05:00 BST