This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "Datatypes R2 Issue 37"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m |
Smrobertson (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
equipment type for FAX, and also VOICE (default) | equipment type for FAX, and also VOICE (default) | ||
and TTD) | and TTD) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Resolution == | ||
| + | Motion: INM revisits the decision to use Use to differentiate between fax and tel (issue 37) and considers the use of x-text-fax instead. In addition we confirm the use of x-text-tel for this use case. (Lloyd/Sandy) (approved INM telecon --GrahameGrieve 13:54, 16 April 2007 (CDT)) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Status == | ||
| + | Resolved | ||
== Links == | == Links == | ||
Back to [[Data Types R2 issues]] | Back to [[Data Types R2 issues]] | ||
Revision as of 00:25, 17 April 2007
Contents
Data Types Issue 37: fax: issue
Introduction
The replacement for rfc 2396 removes the fax protocol from the URL scheme on the basis that it is an equipment type not a communication type. So we need to remove support for the fax scheme and introduce a new vocab item for fax
This would not be backward compatible.
Discussion
Thurs Q3 May 2006: Agree to create a new equipment type for FAX, and also VOICE (default) and TTD)
Resolution
Motion: INM revisits the decision to use Use to differentiate between fax and tel (issue 37) and considers the use of x-text-fax instead. In addition we confirm the use of x-text-tel for this use case. (Lloyd/Sandy) (approved INM telecon --GrahameGrieve 13:54, 16 April 2007 (CDT))
Status
Resolved
Links
Back to Data Types R2 issues
