Paul made that point already. I'll reword so either two locations in one header or two headers with one location is acceptable.
Brian -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 10:37 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Sip] Location-conveyance: ISSUE #3 - multiple locations From: "Brian Rosen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Yeah, I wanted to limit options. I wanted two representations of the same location as a single header. I'm not really stuck on that, but cutting down on options is good. Permit me to exercise one of my peeves -- though it appears that limiting the syntax of the header is beneficial, it is in fact harmful. You want as much uniformity in header syntax as possible, so that implementations can use generic parsers to do the low-level conversion of the character stream to a data structure of names/values/whatever. You also want to allow generic "un-parsing" to convert the data structure to the character stream. But if you make ideosyncratic declarations that a particular header does things *slightly differently* than all similar headers, implementations are reduced to using custom code to generate every header. Dale _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
