[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.

-------------- 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