[Jingle] Typo and possible clarification in XEP 0166

[Peter Saint-Andre]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 4/21/09 5:03 PM, Justin Uberti wrote:
> "Roughly equivalent" is interesting terminology for a standards
> document, but overall it looks good. 
> 
> Also I'm not sure this is a MUST, perhaps there are applications that
> will want to preserve the double-busy that you would get in the
> telephone world, so maybe SHOULD is more appropriate.

SHOULD works for me, given the "roughly equivalent" language. I wasn't
sure how else to phrase that. "Functionally equivalent" perhaps?

Peter

- --
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAknufOUACgkQNL8k5A2w/vyGUwCgvw/TTAWAjhREoCQslYRLyH3S
ghUAoJtVWfEMKrc7XS3OgsB0CFwTLtSS
=zSWt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----