Re: [salud] Revision of the examples

Laura Liess <laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com> Fri, 24 January 2014 08:44 UTC

Return-Path: <laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com>
X-Original-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A96111A0199 for <salud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 00:44:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.377
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.377 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kZFFXIp88heh for <salud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 00:44:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-la0-x233.google.com (mail-la0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CADD31A014B for <salud@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 00:44:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-la0-f51.google.com with SMTP id c6so2277106lan.24 for <salud@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 00:44:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=PeZfN3ldsdo92kjGHqu9SXeGgWWd9E5c5SKF35H1cmY=; b=L/eGiuuOSTS+UPdoO/lwXfXsKqfA0Rnvh5PFWijedCXfq89PWG6pnqdacI6iuYs3E/ hs7WFY4qLrnGMWM915buBeiK0t77TEmG9F9Bf17KfO8KkRDacp+5T4SxTy8mFeSam1iN WvWio/URdwFangW/0DCynQXwiLpfOPVS8DugADR0O/RZ/ob4qo9dUX9TiL96VXy1OH85 RPEk6QHBDuV2SfogdJnIncNFIolTQ4F6CogsVWtYmbH1WvJ1q76iCUi35NdTOF7egrHc Y3yDVnQSF0vLfAoMlV+6HbjmU+86o8NZhc3afb8FBaofXwX6W/1y1YhIoSyPj8e9HGJC OUlw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.87.142 with SMTP id ay14mr7959983lab.7.1390553056044; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 00:44:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.114.169.129 with HTTP; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 00:44:15 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <201401240129.s0O1TGoa3442517@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <201311201944.rAKJiS7d5355422@shell01.TheWorld.com> <528D41F2.8090200@alum.mit.edu> <CACWXZj39wsahY-=VN1e7a=wLK_55H=oVYkeSbRrUce+jMzH_Vg@mail.gmail.com> <201401172041.s0HKf6DN3073812@shell01.TheWorld.com> <CACWXZj21Q+xDLgGOQzGszWrMe3DxhCcqb_4YFUk5UPudA_NnFw@mail.gmail.com> <201401240129.s0O1TGoa3442517@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 09:44:15 +0100
Message-ID: <CACWXZj17wOqNecA=iwy6=Sn30f5h9y2t+_-jWjQ9ZJ9e7ZFM1Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Laura Liess <laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com>
To: "Dale R. Worley" <worley@ariadne.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3560cf26a7d04f0b35c3b
Cc: "salud@ietf.org" <salud@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [salud] Revision of the examples
X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list <salud.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/salud>, <mailto:salud-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/salud/>
List-Post: <mailto:salud@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:salud-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/salud>, <mailto:salud-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 08:44:20 -0000

Dale,

To comply with one of your earlier comments I would add "internal" after
"Signal 3" and  "external" after "Signal 2". So the text is:

*****
So we choose the Signal 3 "internal".

Note that <urn:alert:priority:low> could not be given effect because it
followed <urn:alert:source:internal>.    If the two URNs had appeared in
the reverse order, the Signal 2 "external" would have been chosen, because
<urn:alert:priority:low> would have been  given precedence.
*******

OK for you?
Thank you
Laura







2014/1/24 Dale R. Worley <worley@ariadne.com>

> > >    So we choose the Signal 3.  Note that <urn:alert:priority:low> could
> > >    not be given effect because it followed <urn:alert:source:internal>.
> > >    If the two URNs had appeared in the reverse order, the Signal 2
> would
> > >    have been chosen, because <urn:alert:priority:low> would have been
> > >    given precedence.
>
> Looking at this again, it may be desirable to put a paragraph-break
> after the first sentence.
>
> Dale
>