Subject: Editorial: Consistant labeling of iMIP & iTIP

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 13:31:06 -0500

In trying to match my notes to the latest draft I noticed that the draft 
uses different formating at different points for the same kinds of 
reference.  For example:

   "TARGET" and "CMD" properties.  This memo does not address how a CUA
   transmits iTIP or iMIP objects to non CAP programs.

followed later by:

   some [iMIP] objects or contacting other CS's and performing CAP
   operations on those CSs.

The are mixed "iMIP" and "[iMIP]" references throughout the draft.  Since 
the reference is to the RFC all references probably should be bracketed. I 
dont care which way the change goes as long as its consistant thru the 
draft.

There are also similar iTIP/[iTIP] mixes that should be fixed 
concurrently.

Bruce
 
===========================================================================
Bruce Kahn                                INet: 
[email-masked]
Messaging & Collaboration                 Phone: 978.399.6496
IBM Software Group                         FAX: and nothing but the FAX...
Standard disclaimers apply, even where prohibited by law...

---

From: Doug Royer <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 12:09:59 -0700

[email-masked] wrote:

> 
> The are mixed "iMIP" and "[iMIP]" references throughout the draft. 
>  Since the reference is to the RFC all references probably should be 
> bracketed.  I dont care which way the change goes as long as its 
> consistant thru the draft.

Fixed - thanks!

> There are also similar iTIP/[iTIP] mixes that should be fixed concurrently.

Fixed - thanks!

-- 
-
Doug Royer                       Work: (208)612-INET
[email-masked]                   Fax:  (866)594-8574
http://INET-Consulting.com       Cell: (208)520-4044
http://Royer.com/People/Doug