Re: [salud] Christer's review of draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-09

[Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]>]

On 1/7/14 4:31 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote:

>> Section 1.1. says:
>>
>> "It is not possible to provide semantic indications or names for
>>   rendering characteristics that signals the intent and allows the
>>   recipient UA to decide how to render the received information in an
>>   appropriate way."
>>
>> The sentence is very confusing. Why not simply say something like:
>>
>>   "It is not possible to define semantics associated with a given tone."
>
> The sentence is confusing, but you haven't captured the meaning we
> want (perhaps because we confused you!).  What we are concerned about
> the "specifier" can't state what the semantics of the tone are and let
> the renderer choose the appropriate tone.
>
> How about:
>
>   "There is no method to signal the semantic intention of the tone
>    (without signaling a specific tone) and allowing the recipient UA
>    to decide what tone to use to signal the intention.  Similarly,
>    there is no method to signal particular rendering features (such as
>    short duration, delay, or country-specific conventions) without
>    signaling a specific tone."

I don't think that quite gets it either, because it implies that the 
semantics need to be indicated using a tone. Part of the point is that 
the indication might use other modalities.

How about:

  "There is no method to signal the semantic intention of the alert
   and allowing the recipient UA form of alert indication (such as
   a particular tone, vibration, or visual display) to use to signal
   the intention.  Similarly, there is no method to signal particular
   rendering features (such as short duration, delay, or country-
   specific conventions)."

	Thanks,
	Paul