(unknown charse

Hi Matt,

On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 11:15:40AM -0000, Matt Long wrote:
>  
> So…if you define the request ‘types’ that encode RespondWith in Binding Section
> 3.2.3 you do clarify w/o changing schema.  Then the negation aspects are
> redundant *for* clarity (which I do not object).

Could you propose a text change for this section so that the WG can decide
whether they accept it or not? The rule of thumb is that if this requires
something more than a small  immediate change in implementations (following
the implementors opinion), then it's too late to make the change now.

In all cases, your time won't be wasted as it will be documented in the 
issues list and can be reused in a new edition of the spec. if the need
arises.

Thanks!

-jose