Re: CAP 13: Bad CAL-QUERY example / description?

[email protected] wrote:

>
> Doug responded on 06/11/2004 01:40:31 PM:
> > > 1: Component integrity is not always preserved.
> >
> >
> > So you say. EXACTLY HOW?
>
> Go reread my previous posts in this thread for citations and examples. 
>  I wont repeat them here ad infinitum. 

I consider this thread closed. I see no new points raised and I have not 
been convinced that it is any
more than a disire to get something changed that you do not like. You 
have said that you and your
company are not implemeting CAP, has that changed?  Everyone that I 
personally know that
is impleminting CAP have proposed no changes in this area.  We seem to 
be able to parse
it and implment it.  There is at least one company that is (or soon will 
be) shipping a CAP
product based on the drafts, yet they can make it work. I do not see 
this as a technical
problem with the spec. The missing ABNF will be fixed, other than that 
it seems to work.

-- 

Doug Royer                     |   http://INET-Consulting.com
-------------------------------|-----------------------------
[email protected]                 | Office: (208)520-4044
http://Royer.com/People/Doug   | Fax:    (866)594-8574
                               | Cell:   (208)520-4044

              We Do Standards - You Need Standards