Unclear asymmetry in the interpretation of capability

In describing standard capabilities, the specification makes no distinction between capabilities provided by the local end and those provided by the remote end. This is generally fine because they largely represent the same concept in both contexts.

However, the "browserVersion" capability differs--the value provided by the local end may describe a range of versions, while the value provided by the remote end describes exactly one version.

This distinction is only apparent in the "matching capabilities" algorithm. While I doubt any protocol-level change is necessary here, I'm curious if the editors have any opinions about if/how this distinction can be communicated more clearly. For instance, the current description of the capability is inaccurate:

Capability	Key	Value Type	Description
Browser version	"browserVersion"	string	Identifies the version of the user agent.

Start with the "matching capabilities" algorithm and the current "browserVersion" capability description linked in the issue. Compare how local-end and remote-end values are described, then clarify the distinction in the specification if appropriate; done means the capability documentation accurately communicates the asymmetry without an unnecessary protocol change.