On Feb 20, 2008, at 12:28 AM, Ted Hardie wrote: > > . If the idea is that the specification of > "pic" or "name" is at the level of the specification of an event > package, > then we are dealing with something else entirely and the draft can > be re-written to express that. But I would expect, in that case, > for each > of the registered purposes to be very carefully specified as to what > the > acting application would do with them. And I suspect pretty much > everything like "name" would have to go.
Ok, I think I agree with you here. Each "purpose" would need to be very clearly specified, at roughly the same level of detail as is required for an event package or would be required for an INFO package if we were to go that way. And yes, the draft is a bit short on this right now. -- Dean _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list http://www.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
