On Jul 1, 2012, at 12:29 AM, Kurt Zeilenga wrote: > > I don't really object to the spec being called "real time text". What I > object to is not keep clear (and separate) issues which pertain to RTT as a > extension to XMPP IM vs. RTT as a part of 'total (real-time) conversation > service".
Heard and understood. That sounds like a good idea. RTT as a part of total (real-time) conversation is a potential USE of RTT-XMPP-IM, not a required use or required context of use. RTT-XMPP-IM is an entity totally separate from Total Conversation. (though one use might be in a Total Conversation service) Gregg
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
