Subj : FTS-xxxx.001  PING and TRACE flags
To   : Rob Swindell
From : Andrew Leary
Date : Sun Apr 18 2021 01:50 am

Hello Rob!

17 Apr 21 18:38, you wrote to Michiel van der Vlist:

RS> @TZUTC: -0700
RS> @MSGID: 31180.ftsc_pub@1:103/705 24e13d70
RS> @REPLY: 2:280/5555 607b3d0b
RS> @PID: Synchronet 3.19a-Win32 master/ed1d83733 Apr 17 2021 MSC 1928
RS> @TID: SBBSecho 3.14-Linux master/aed987f4a Apr 16 2021 GCC 8.3.0
RS> @CHRS: ASCII 1
RS> @NOTE: FSEditor.js v1.104
RS>   Re: FTS-xxxx.001  PING and TRACE flags
RS>   By: Michiel van der Vlist to All on Sat Apr 17 2021 09:54 pm

>> in FTS-5001.006, the PING functionality contains two parts. PING
>> and TRACE. According to that specification systems flying the PING
>> flag

RS> Make that: "two parts: PING and TRACE."

>> argue that current practise is that TRACE functionality is
>> optional.

RS> Alternate spelling of "practice" there.

>> current practise works well, but that it is not complient with the
RS>                                                    ^^^^^^^^^ spelling

>> Making the TRACE function optional by seperating the flags, is an
RS>                                          ^^^^^^^^^^ spelling

>> TRACE functionality for later or ommit it completely without
RS>                                     ^^^^^ spelling

>> that do not support TRACE need do nothing, They are complient

RS>                                         caps  ^        ^^^^^^^^^
RS> spelling

>> complient with the new specs, it just does not advertise all
RS>    ^^^^^^^^^ spelling

RS> What's the FTSC documentation standard regarding grammar and spelling?

All of your changes above have been applied to the next draft.  Thanks for
your input.

Andrew

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)