> Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 11:50:42 +0100
> From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
>
> I don't think that [the addinfo strings are] -necessarily- machine
> readable. For example diagnostic 1 has 'debugging information
> (traceback)' for the details which is very unlikely to be machine
> readable.

What I don't understand is Ray's position that it's a _bad_ thing for
client software to be able to do anything with addInfo.  Does anyone
have an argument in favour of this position?  Because if we really
believe that, we may as well toss away the entire diagnostic structure
and just send a single human-readable error-message.  (Which, to be
completely clear, I am _not_ suggesting!)

 _/|_    _______________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor  <[log in to unmask]>  http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\  "By filing this bug report you have challenged the honor of
         my family.  PREPARE TO DIE!" -- Klingon Programming Mantra

--
Listen to free demos of soundtrack music for film, TV and radio
        http://www.pipedreaming.org.uk/soundtrack/