Subject: paceDateKarlGuertin

From: grayrest <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:21:50 -0400

Hi all. I've thrown my own proposal [1] on the fire. I prefer the two
fuller date proposals (Asbjorn, Antone) over the other two (Sam's and
Ken's) and Ken's over Sam's. The reason for this is that I don't like
having to read (and understand the implications of) other specs to
implement common behavior. At the same time, I feel that both
Asbjorn's and Antone's proposals would be more difficult to implement
than necessary.

[1] http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/paceDateKarlGuertin

If I've messed up some formatting or protocol, I beg your forgiveness. Cheers.

Karl Guertin

---

From: Asbjørn Ulsberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 01:09:11 +0200

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:21:50 -0400, grayrest <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Hi all. I've thrown my own proposal [1] on the fire.

I think you should read this message from Paul so that your pace can  
conform more to his guidelines:

<url: http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg08319.html>

You should for example not use full date names for the elements, since  
those are baked with different meaning for all readers.

-- 
Asbjørn Ulsberg         -=|=-        [email-masked]
«He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»