Re: Message arguments for chords...

[Erik Ostrom <eostrom@research.att.com>]

> gah, yeah, this is broken.  i'm for making '_' reserved by #$#cord,
> any objections?

What happened to the proposal that '_' keywords are reserved for future 
versions of the MCP spec?

Note that another way to go is simply to say that all arguments besides
the specific arguments '_id' and '_message' are passed along to the cord.
For that matter, one could as easily say that ALL arguments are passed
along to the cord; the cord just won't have any use for the _id and
_message arguments.  This fits very naturally with the "drop excess
baggage on the floor" philosophy expressed elsewhere in the spec.

More generally, do we have a rationale for the cord keywords using
'_id' and '_message' instead of 'id' and 'message'?  If anything, putting
aside the '_'-is-reserved proposal, it makes more sense to me that 'id'
and 'message', being arguments to an ordinary MCP message, should be
underscoreless, and it's the _cord_ arguments that should be specially
marked.

--Erik