On 06/23/2011 10:09 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 09:59:48AM -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>> Now, I'm fine with using something other than "absent" ("omitted",
>> "withheld", ...), but -1 on any terminology that allows the WC to presume to
>> know what it simply cannot.
> 
> Julian also suggested "server-excluded". Would that work?

Sure!  That would work quite well, actually.

Now, understand that we'd still have "absent" in the RA layers, editor
vtable, etc..  I seem to recall you being somewhat vocal about such
inconsistencies in the past.  But maybe we can tweak those things over time,
too, as necessary (editorv2).

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to