|
Re: Why MD5 Headers are Imperative: msg#00469network.syndication.atom.protocol
I am astonished at the lack of concern here for the key element of what I'm saying: I have a fully RFC-compliant Atom deployment. It only breaks when I attempt to implement _your_ spec. With _my_ spec it works beautifully and is still a fully RFC-compliant Atom deployment, with PUT. Doesn't working code count for anything? Not that I can back that up publicly just yet, but how about some benefit of the doubt? -EJB |
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | Re: Why MD5 Headers are Imperative: 00469, Eric J. Bowman |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Why MD5 Headers are Imperative: 00469, Joe Gregorio |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Why MD5 Headers are Imperativei: 00469, Michael Wechner |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Why MD5 Headers are Imperative: 00469, James M Snell |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
| News | FAQ | advertise |