Hi, some first comments/observations: - I think the structure of namespace could be explained - example of status response in 4.1 does not explain too much (looks the same as earlier response example) - in 4.3.2.6 the concept of key could be explained more (for me the key represents some bigger information structure; reasons: performance, simplicity) - in 4.3.2.7 the reference to "Characteristic" document is missing - I'm wondering whether we can say in 4.3.3 that the request with more data triggers includes logical independent sub-requests - 4.4.1: typo "request schema" - I would remove parameter elements "supportedEventType" from all message examples. I understand that it's supported by the implementations but it's agreed to use eventType element - I think we have to rebuild Result Code section and finish the discussion on new ideas proposed by Slawek and Jeff. That's very important and must be done. Roman