Subject: [Geopriv] CORRECTION to draft-winterbottom-geopriv-pdif-lo-profile-00 review

From: "James M. Polk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 07:37:20 -0600

James (and group)

It was late when I did this review and I mixed meanings in part of my 
review of this ID.

The ID's rules #3 and #5 do not violate the laws I stated when regarding 
all tuples within a single document being the same location.

I mixed the meaning in my head (through IETF numbness this week) to think 
the ID was stating "within the same message"; meaning all LOs within the 
same message have to be pointed at the same location. This latter case 
cannot be true for the reasons I stated in the first review.

I agree with this part of the ID as is in this case that all tuples within 
the same PIDF-LO document point at the same location (though I'm still 
confused about the priority angle).

Sorry for this error on my part.

cheers,
James

                                *******************
                 Truth is not to be argued... it is to be presented

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv