Re: [tap] Weird thought for the day: "skip 71 - reason"

Ovid <publiustemp-tapx@yahoo.com> Fri, 05 March 2010 16:12 UTC

Return-Path: <publiustemp-tapx@yahoo.com>
X-Original-To: tap@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tap@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F203C28C2BB for <tap@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Mar 2010 08:12:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.392
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.392 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.207, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gK7Kp4b0N8lA for <tap@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Mar 2010 08:12:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from n9.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com (n9.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com [76.13.13.237]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id CB81628C26F for <tap@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Mar 2010 08:12:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [76.13.13.25] by n9.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Mar 2010 16:12:42 -0000
Received: from [76.13.10.162] by t4.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Mar 2010 16:12:42 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp103.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Mar 2010 16:12:42 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 315575.37047.bm@omp103.mail.ac4.yahoo.com
Received: (qmail 46237 invoked by uid 60001); 5 Mar 2010 16:12:42 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1267805562; bh=M0sHNMNk9vcQREhcKpm1iYPkxe/v/JNPySeiAYANYsA=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=SBjmgb18gyeJ1nhDsR++Ea4TJdncOjrbbXSTqucPRAbk1fwzqn6Jdc3+GZYBm52VolTqXbICqZxAhTy9RBl4zvbRQTP2Z48XUEO/zU9R12LykTDS5FudHCH8pMBlKFKe214rEFTwYhE0Y4TsZrSMxX1Q+YK58eKgFWvpqQlvZZQ=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=FT9SiBjOsUO4iKSFiNnAGrx5B92WOw/yNGuaAYSKlZWGrEBEGQ0lziJvkItU1NSpWHQcRc8UyvY5nP5keTHR/6tUqPC6tgW45trj8yWHGfhZWs/Gm2/co/Zfddsb/pvIjjoBanNL+rn925hpbBaamc2YgBk/ahIKjD3CCmFCRog=;
Message-ID: <91241.45851.qm@web65716.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
X-YMail-OSG: PPVxfGMVM1mOEGxOCJS.Ea5ibfIyoUH7k225A17gpt02xa_KSrIsB5T0Cht6Fd87k0LDDmK8fCXLeSY67Ba4AzcNSXz1DQHNTC1ncQCjYyemt3lu1tLUuUq9X2bwM5AVqbZrnJzV41zMGMDq_JPSnYTj3p1uFZyUYaYph.utbFtsthLy3boU.hUTQ2OlGT91mgAZNenp6kW1oF_f8jIp._.1bstbNQbzMIpywz7ixDXf5CWjampBzOiKb2FajeQ2pLn5EF2lqbQLLAk8neMx1z.PJ4F32ASmwy2d61W_sy.fTqLvBD25RpIuRRz45J2rsSekR.LeepFJE1zwTbjMHgb5yA4d5H_A_HcI6J2p2mY-
Received: from [132.185.144.122] by web65716.mail.ac4.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 05 Mar 2010 08:12:42 PST
X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/300.3 YahooMailWebService/0.8.100.260964
References: <411886.95806.qm@web65707.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <D9F21163-EC5A-4023-BD5D-9FCF60A86FBE@hexten.net>
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 08:12:42 -0800 (PST)
From: Ovid <publiustemp-tapx@yahoo.com>
To: Andy Armstrong <andy@hexten.net>
In-Reply-To: <D9F21163-EC5A-4023-BD5D-9FCF60A86FBE@hexten.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: tap@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [tap] Weird thought for the day: "skip 71 - reason"
X-BeenThere: tap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Test Anything Protocol WG discussions <tap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tap>, <mailto:tap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tap>
List-Post: <mailto:tap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tap>, <mailto:tap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2010 16:12:44 -0000

----- Original Message ----
> From: Andy Armstrong <andy@hexten.net>


> It makes more sense - but raises a wider question about how much of the grammar 
> we're prepared to change. Are we saying that for TAP v14 we can basically change 
> anything?


I think a TAP consumer could conceivably indicate to the producer which version of TAP it supports.  The produce is not bound by this and should produce TAP compatible with version 13. If not version is specified, again, 13 (if 14 is not backwards compatible).  Otherwise, if the producer and consumer can produce/understand richer TAP levels, we have a win.

That being said, I don't think "skip 3" is a compelling enough argument for this.

And Salve, I just wasn't aware this. I remember old conversations where it was agreed that the behaviour is unspecified.
 
I would just like to get people thinking about what we can do, rather than keep our thinking small (though my modest proposal was rather small :)

Cheers,
Ovid--
Buy the book - http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/perlhks/
Tech blog - http://use.perl.org/~Ovid/journal/
Twitter - http://twitter.com/OvidPerl
Official Perl 6 Wiki - http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6