Re: Communication means in draft-ietf-impp-cpim-pidf-05

Mark Day wrote:
> 
> I think the relevant point for interoperability is that implementations
> should avoid assuming that another party splits presentities/tuples in the
> same way. For example, it's perfectly reasonable for the user agents of one
> system to display presentities as "people" and tuples as "devices" while the
> user agents of another system displays presentities as "people's devices"
> and suppresses tuples (since maybe each presentity only ever sends one).

I'm with you this far.

> But if those systems are interoperating, it would be bad if they applied
> those same display techniques to the information received from the other
> system.

How could they do otherwise? The act of inserting a gateway between the two systems doesn't change the behavior of the other components of those systems. Or are you saying that as part of establishing interoperation, each system must enhance its intrinsic model to embrace the concepts of the other? That seems much less likely to happen than the installation of gateways.

	Paul



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