>>1. In Section 3, it says:
>>
>><snip/>
>> Does this mean that the annotation A can be used by *any* module
>> the server advertises, or just the modules that define/import
>> annotation A?
>
>For all modules implemented by the server, no import is needed.
Good, but I think the text should say this explicitly.
>> I assume that the intent is for the annotation to apply to
>> the server as a whole, not any specific module. It might
>
>Yes. The description can also say that the annotation is ignored
>elsewhere.
Maybe I don't understand your response, but if we agree that annotations
are a server-level thing (not module-specific), then I do not agree that a
module's description should be able to say that an annotation should be
ignored in other modules.
>> help enforce this if annotations can only be defined in
>> modules that don't define any data-nodes and it is required
>> that the server advertises this module explicitly (not via
>> an import)...
>
>I expect this will be the normal way of defining annotations, and it
>could appear in the document as a guideline. I don't think though it is
>necessary to state it as a hard rule.
OK, a SHOULD or RECOMMENDED statement would help to clarify this.
>>3. In Section 4.2.2, adding metadata to the first entry in a list doesn't
>> seem elegant. Can we instead create a special list element like the
>> following?
>
>Maybe I don't understand but the idea is that a separate metadata objects
>can be attached to any or all entries of a list. In the example it is
>added only to the first entry but another metadata object could be added
>to the second entry as well.
I see, but then this make the example misleading. I thought it was trying
to show how to place an annotation on the list as a whole. I see now it
says "list instance", but this seems uninteresting example, as list
instances are just nodes for which how to apply annotations is already
known - there's nothing special about the node being a list element -
right?
>It is not possible to add an annotation to the whole list, also because
>this cannot be represented in XML encoding (via attributes).
An annotation cannot be attached to a list as a whole? - that seems
fundamentally broken, though I understand why you say it cannot be easily
represented in XML (via attributes). Should we consider alternative
representations?
That said, if unavoidable, the draft needs to call that out as a
limitation somewhere, because it wan't clear to me. Are there other
limitations that are not also not being called out?
Thanks,
Kent (as a contributor)
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
