Scott, I can add text describing the "name" and "op" attributes in draft-ietf-regext-change-poll as being ASCII identifiers to clarify this. — JG
James Gould Distinguished Engineer [email protected] 703-948-3271 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com/> On 1/19/18, 12:24 PM, "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email protected]> wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: Gould, James > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 12:02 PM > To: Hollenbeck, Scott <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' > <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] WGLC: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-change-poll > > Scott, > > Thank you for your review and feedback. I provide my answers to the > feedback below. > > — > > JG > > > > James Gould > Distinguished Engineer > [email protected] > > 703-948-3271 > 12061 Bluemont Way > Reston, VA 20190 > > Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com/> > > On 1/18/18, 12:16 PM, "regext on behalf of Hollenbeck, Scott" <regext- > [email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: regext [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of James > Galvin > > Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 8:29 AM > > To: Registration Protocols Extensions <[email protected]> > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [regext] WGLC: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft- > > ietf-regext-change-poll > > > > The document editors have indicated that the following document is > ready > > for submission to the IESG to be considered for publication as a > Proposed > > Standard: > > > > Change Poll Extension for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-06 > > Comments: > > There probably shouldn't be any normative language in the abstract. > Please change "MAY" to "may". > > Done > > Section 3.1.2: does the name attribute for the "custom" case > identifier have an i18n considerations? > > No, this matches the use of the “name” attribute of the “custom” phase in > draft-ietf-regext-launchphase and the use of the “op” attribute of the > “custom” operation in draft-ietf-regext-change-poll. In this case as with > the other cases, these are custom identifiers that don’t have i18n > considerations. I'm not sure I agree with that. This is what I see in the Schema from draft-ietf-regext-launchphase: <complexType name="phaseType"> <simpleContent> <extension base="launch:phaseTypeValue"> <attribute name="name" type="token"/> </extension> </simpleContent> </complexType> The value associated with a "name" attribute is an XML Schema token data type. These are strings. If an attribute value like "mañana"(<changePoll:caseId name="mañana">custom</changePoll:caseId>) is legit, isn't there a need for a language tag? If not, maybe some more text is needed (in multiple documents, perhaps) to explain that these identifiers are not intended to be human-readable character strings and only ASCII characters should be used. If character limitations are needed it would be worth exploring how to enforce that restriction in the schema. > Section 5.1: The title of this section is "XML Namespace", but it > seems to be conflating a registration request for an XML namespace and the > XML Schema described in Section 4. I'm going to recommend registering both > the namespace and the schema in the same way it's done in, for example, > RFC 5731. > > I went ahead and revised the IANA Considerations section to match RFC 5731 > and draft-ietf-regext-launchphase. Thanks. All good! Scott _______________________________________________ regext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
