> I changed "select" to "select/seize" globally in the > document. I'm not sure it helps readability, but I think we > need both terms.
Here is an explanation what I meant with "seize" versus "select". I might have been using a definition of "selection" that is different from what you had in mind. In my mind, I was equating "seizing" with the concept of actually reserving the AOR for ones self by PUBLISHing (or NOTIFYing) the Appearance agent of the call state "premptively". In contrast, I was using the term "selection" to mean the local action (on the phone) of choosing which "line" to use (i.e., the "From" header). This is local because it does not require any publication of state to the appearance agent. The user presses a line key, no signalling comes out immediately (and user probably hears dial tone). When the call is eventually made, it uses that line that was "selected" as the originator (i.e., the From header). I am proposing that if we use these definitions, then it makes it much clearer throughout the document what we are talking about. There are lots of cases where we mean "selection or seizing" (because the PUBLISH/ SUBSCRIBE is optional), and in other cases, we really mean the "seizing". So, for example, in 10.4, messages F1-F2 are actually a "seizing", not merely a "selection". Anyways, just think about it. I think there are people who would want to implement the "line seizure" concept, and people who would NOT want to implement it. If it's clear what "seizure" means, then it makes it obvious in the text what is the optional part. _______________________________________________ BLISS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss
