Re: Comments on draft-ietf-bliss-shared-appearances-07

(Despite the Subject: line, which is the Subject: of the message I am
replying to, all text references in my new text are to the -08 version.)

Only the items which have an ongoing discussion:

> > BTW, is the latest decision that appearance numbers start with 0,
> > rather than 1?
> 
> No, the decision was that appearance numbers start at 1.  I think I
> have found all the cases of appearance zero and removed them from the
> document now.

OK.

> > But this leads to the point that there is no clear, separate
> > description of the fundamental protocol action, viz., the UA sends a
> > PUBLISH to the Appearance Agent to request an appearance assignment
> > and the Appearance Agent sends a NOTIFY back to the UA with the final
> > assignment.
> 
> This UA behavior is described in Section 5.3.  I would prefer to leave
> it there rather than move it to this section.

OK.  I think I wrote my original objection when I was reading 5.2 (and
noticing that it was discussing actions) but had not yet read 5.3.

> > BTW, is there a default value for "exclusive"?  The schema doesn't
> > show one.
> 
> I clarified that it is false, the same as if it is not present.  I