RE: Attempt to summarize various threads

Sorry, I should have said "me too" but it felt a little redundant. I
think you should probably take the absence of any argument as acceptance
at this point.

Adrian.

On 23 December 2002 15:36, Hiroyasu Sugano wrote:
> Thanks, Jonathan.
> 
> Although I've received no other comments or responses, probably 
> because of
> Holiday season, I think it is better to go forward.  I will submit it
immediately.
> 
> --  Hiroyasu Sugano
> 
> 
> > This is fine by me.
> > 
> > -Jonathan R.
> > 
> > Hiroyasu Sugano wrote:
> > > Hi, all.
> > > 
> > > Sorry for my delayed response.
> > > I have managed my time to revise the PIDF draft.
> > > 
> > > 
> > >>3. Is it OK for there to be zero tuples in PIDF?  Yes, but we need
> > >>to add text to the spec discouraging any attempt to use e.g.
<note> 
> > >>as a non-interoperable substitute for status.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > In addition to some changes to allow zero tuples (including Schema
> > > Definition and DTD),  I have inserted a simple paragraph as
follows 
> > > after the first paragraph of Section 4.1.6 (The <note> element);
> > > 
> > >    Note that, wherever it appears, a <note> element SHOULD NOT be
used,
> > >    and interpreted, as a non-interoperable substitute for status
of its
> > >    parent element.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Does it work?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -- Hiroyasu Sugano
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions,
> > > please]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                72 Eagle Rock Ave.
> > Chief Scientist                             First Floor
> > dynamicsoft                                 East Hanover, NJ 07936
> > [email protected]                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
> > http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
> > http://www.dynamicsoft.com
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions,
> > please]
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>   [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, 
> please]
> 
> 
> 
> 





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