On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Saašha Metsärantala <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> whether these use cases justify the additional complexity,
> Working with EDTF is not trivial, which may have some correlations with the
> fact that this work have not been done before, even if there has been a need
> for it since a long time.
> I feel confident that we will manage to formulate a BNF taking into account
> most of the complexity of today's EDTF draft.
>> I'm really concerned about a workable spec:
> I'm too! For the EDTF to be used, it must cover many needs, which in turn
> means that most of its users will probably not use all of its features.
Yes, but needs of <1% of use cases shouldn't make the other 99+% of
them significantly more difficult. There has to be a sweet spot we hit
that balances richness of expression with practicability.
I'm open to being convinced on this case, but still worry about it.