JK Martin wrote:
>> Chuck,
>> Nice job on the update. Is there some reason you chose to name the
> file "err2"? (Does "err" stand for anything?)
No it does not and since this should be incorporated
in the Internet draft or issued as an informational
RFC it probably does not much matter what we
call this file. My question now is:
Should we wrap this up in some text and add it to the RFC?
Or should we create an informational RFC?
Next version (the one with the changes to
hrPrinterDetectedErrorState per Harry's input)
will be called something more descriptive. If
we are going to need another version of this
document before proceeding any further.
Chuck Adams