On 8/2/06, "Döring, Markus" <m.doering@bgbm.org> wrote:

that sounds best to me so far.
yes, any other suggestion?

-- Markus

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org
> [mailto:tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org ] Im Auftrag von
> Renato De Giovanni
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 2. August 2006 14:38
> An: tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org
> Betreff: Re: [tdwg-tapir] log only terminology
>
> Markus,
>
> How about defining a controlled vocabulary?
> <operations logRequests="[required | accepted | denied]">
> --
> Renato
>
> On 2 Aug 2006 at 11:23, "Döring, Markus" wrote:
>
> > hi,
> > I am wondering about the naming for the attribute in the
> capabilities that tells others if this provider wants to
> receive log-only requests. How should we call it?
> >
> > <operations logRequestsDesired="true"> <operations
> > logRequestsDenied="false"> <operations logRequests="true">
> <operations
> > logRequestsAccepted="true">
> >
> > >From those I would opt for "logRequestsDesired".
> > Any preferences or different suggestions?
> >
> > regards
> > -- Markus
>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-tapir mailing list
> tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tapir
>
_______________________________________________
tdwg-tapir mailing list
tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org
http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tapir