Re: [Slim] Indication of modality alternatives in draft-ietf-slim-negotiating-human-language -Issue #46

[Bernard Aboba <[e-mail]>]

Fine with me (though I agree it is not necessary).

> On Oct 14, 2017, at 5:25 PM, Randall Gellens <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> I really think the wording is fine as it is.  I don't see any implication that all streams will be used.  However, in an effort to move beyond what seems to me a silly argument, rather than try to come up with fancy wording that may say the wrong thing, we can simply ad a very clear and direct note.  I propose we add "(Note that not all streams will necessarily be used.)" to the text.  That is, we change the section from:
> 
>   This document defines two media-level attributes starting with
>   'hlang' (short for "human interactive language") to negotiate which
>   human language is selected for use in each interactive media stream.
>   There are two attributes, one ending in "-send" and the other in
>   "-recv", registered in Section 6.  Each can appear in offers and
>   answers for media streams.
> 
> to:
> 
>   This document defines two media-level attributes starting with
>   'hlang' (short for "human interactive language") to negotiate which
>   human language is selected for use in each interactive media stream.
>   (Note that not all streams will necessarily be used.)  There are two
>   attributes, one ending in "-send" and the other in "-recv",
>   registered in Section 6.  Each can appear in offers and answers for
>   media streams.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Randall Gellens
> Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
> -------------- Randomly selected tag: ---------------
> Premature optimization is the root of all evil
>                             --C. A. R. Hoare