RE: PIDF - same schema with nicer formatting (blank lines)

Hi,

There are a some things that I want to examine in more detail with the
schema but I haven't found the time yet. I thought it might be best if I
outlined a couple of my thoughts in a broad sense at this point anyway.

* Need to make sure that the <basic> status element isn't mandatory. It
should be optional.

* I'm wondering about the use of <sequence> in some places (status?) -
will we always wish to impose this ordering?

Incidentally, on a slightly different topic, I remember the size of the
priority value having been mentioned sometime (months) ago. I also
recall having seen a message on the SIMPLE list recently mentioning
mapping some SIP(ish?) value onto the PIDF priority. Is there a reason
why we chose to use a byte for this? I'm worried that people might be
using broader values in other environments and I'm not sure if there is
a huge benefit in the current restriction. Is this an issue to anyone?

Adrian.


On 24 April 2002 16:03, Carr, Wayne wrote:
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
[snip]




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