Re: [disc] argument order to cords...

[Andrew Wilson <andrew@aaaaaaaa.demon.co.uk>]

Erik Ostrom:
> 
> > o	cords are a special case of MCP message with a fixed
> > 	keyword/value order
> 
> No.  The use of the word "after" in the spec is incorrect.

So, cords *are* a special case of MCP message where the order is
important.  What are we confusing each other about here?!

> To reply to your other message, I have no real objection to moving
> cords out of the main spec.  Although I think anyone who doesn't
> implement them should be shunned and cast away.

Then prepare to shun me like the fool I am until cords are better
specified.

> --Erik

Ay.