[Standards] Bookmarks 2 extensibility

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Mon Nov 25 14:17:15 UTC 2019


On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 at 14:12, Evgeny <xramtsov at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 4:47 PM, Philipp Hörist <philipp at hoerist.com>
> wrote:
> > From a programming perspective I would argue that storing one element
> > away is much less work than searching for all unknown child elements.
>
> +1. I also disagree with what Jonas and Dave said: we should not abuse
> extensibility by putting any element inside any other element. I think
> semantics matters here and children elements should be somehow related
> to their parents elements, even though the namespace is different.
>

I'm not sure what your argument is here. If it's that bookmarks data
elements cannot have elements added that do not relate to the bookmark, I
think that's self-evident but hard to police.

If you're saying we shouldn't have arbitrary namespaced data in such
places, I disagree.

Dave.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20191125/d330b3b3/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list