Le 2011-10-20 à 11:24, Matt Miller a écrit :

> Personally, I think the bar for inclusion of classes ought to be higher than 
> one protocol,

maybe. but at least one... at the same time, if the bar is too high, we will 
end up with not a framework useful, but a too small set that would have a lot 
of profiles that changes the basic set. So there is a balance.

Marc.

> but I don't have a more definitive bar to set.  The DomainNameClass most 
> likely exceeds my nebulous bar, but I think we should get through the basics 
> first.
> 
> 
> On Oct 20, 2011, at 04:49, Marc Blanchet wrote:
> 
>> maybe useful, but I think we should do the "least" amount of classes, 
>> criteria being that at least one protocol is using it. This would be for the 
>> framework document. Obviously, a protocol can define a sub-class or else. So 
>> if we see right now a protocol that would be using a new class, I think it 
>> is a good idea to put it in the framework, otherwise leave it.
>> 
>> Marc.
>> 
>> Le 2011-10-19 à 19:03, Dave Thaler a écrit :
>> 
>>> Currently NameClass is pretty generic.  I'm wondering whether it would make 
>>> sense to define any
>>> more complex concepts/subclasses.
>>> 
>>> For example DomainNameClass might be a subclass with a specific set of 
>>> default
>>> values of Valid, Disallowed, Case Mapping, etc.
>>> 
>>> We might also define the concept of a ComplexClass, which would mean that 
>>> the string has
>>> some internal structure (e.g., delimiter) where each portion might 
>>> naturally map to another
>>> class (SecretClass, NameClass, or whatever).   For example an email address 
>>> is a ComplexClass,
>>> which is itself composed of two pieces with different classes (left side 
>>> and right side of @).
>>> 
>>> Useful or not useful?
>>> 
>>> -Dave
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> precis mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> precis mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis
> 
> - m&m
> 
> Matt Miller - <[email protected]>
> Collaboration Software Group - Cisco Systems, Inc.
> 

_______________________________________________
precis mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis

Reply via email to