Hi Guenter, > > Overall this is quite vague and, especially for chargers, most of the time > > misses the point. > > > > I would really prefer if we could stay closer to the specification in this > > case, and not try to merge multiple orthogonal attributes into one. > > OK. So what would you propose?
I'm actually only conserned about the accessory case, as there we are really not a source/sink/DRP, nor are we DPF/UFP/DRD. Should we use this attribute to only express if the type of the partner is "normal" or an accessory? Thanks, -- heikki
