Re: Negotiation: declaring baseline capabilities

[Hiroshi Tamura <tamura@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Short comments.

> (e) Receiver has lower feature capabilities that do not match any 
> alternative offered by the sender.

> (ii) Receiver does not display data and requests alternative, supplying its 
> own capabilities so that the sender can select an alternative.
> (iii) Receiver does not display data and reports failure.

> (e) -> (ii) or (iii)?

> The possible disadvantage in this case would be that if the sender does not 
> have a suitable alternative, an additional round-trip message may be 
> incurred (sections 3.3, 6.3).

Oh, that's right.

> Because there is a general presumption of a universally supported baseline 
> format (Section 2.1.1, para 3) I tend to prefer option (ii).

I also prefer (ii) in this case, although it may cause
additional message as the above.

> I think the receiver's behaviour is the point of debate, then the issue of 
> whether the sender declares lesser feature support follows from 
> that.  Either way, I think some clarification in the document will be required.

I think so, too. Thank you for your thoughful comments.

Regards,
--
Hiroshi Tamura, Ricoh Company, LTD.
E-mail: tamura@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx