RE: PIDF status values

At 03:35 PM 4/18/02 +0100, Adrian Bateman wrote:
> > >To address Graham's issue with a status value registry, aren't we
> > >covered by simply registering the xml namespace urn?
> >
> > Thanks:  I think this works OK -- are we clear about what happens with
> > unrecognized status code elements? (I think other wording in the
>document
> > covers this but it might help to be explicit in the section on status
>value
> > extensibility.  Just one sentence -- I can supply some words if you
>wish.)
>
>Well, I included something like this in 4.1.4 (which was pretty much
>copied from one of your previous e-mails). Does it need repeating again
>further down? If you think so, I have no objections.

That looks fine.  I can't think why I overlooked it;  I did look, but 
obviously not closely enough.

Thanks.

#g

-------------------
Graham Klyne
<[email protected]>



  [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, please]