Hi.
Reviewed this latest draft. Overall, still +1 for the next step. :) But, in
case it helps clarify further, wanted to share these observations:
Section 1:
"The redacted JSON fields will either be removed or have empty values in the
RDAP response." ... Isn't that incomplete, now that we have partial value and
replacement methods as well?
Section 3:
"The redaction of RDAP fields fall into the three categories defined in the
following sub-sections." ... Should it not be four categories now?
Section 3.1:
"The Redaction by Removal Method is when the RDAP field is removed from the
RDAP response, which is the preferred method." ... Why is it preferred? It just
happens to be for optional fields’ redaction, no? As-is, it seems to connote:
prefer redacting optional fields. Perhaps "default method" is a better phrase
than "preferred method".
Section 3.2:
"The Redaction by Empty Value Method is when a redacted field is not removed,
but its value is set to an empty value, such as "" for a jCard [RFC7095] Text
("text") property or null for a non-Text property." ... Found "null for a
non-Text property" to be a bit confusing given a string JSON type can also be
set to null, AFAIK.
"The Redaction by Empty Value Method SHOULD be used only when redacting JSON
response fields that use the position in an array to signal the redacted field"
… Why just that? Why not for a required field that needs to be emptied (instead
of a non-empty replacement) for redaction?
Section 4.2:
"The "redacted" member is included as a member of the object class in a lookup
response, such as the object classes defined in [RFC9083], and as a member of
the object instances in a search response, such as the object instances defined
in [RFC9083]." ... Found the "object class" and "object instance" use a bit
confusing here. Would it be better to say: "The "redacted" member is included
as a member of the object instance in a lookup response, for the object classes
defined in [RFC9083], and as a member of the array of object instances in a
search response."?
"name" ... Is it a REQUIRED member of a child object of the "redacted" array?
Is so, good to mark it as REQUIRED given we mark other fields as OPTIONAL.
"pathLang" … Knowing JSONPath is the only query expression lang mentioned in
this draft, wonder if some folks would ask why JSONPointer [1] was not chosen
as a pathLang, or if it could be a pathLang? Do we want to provide any
guidance/clarification via-a-vis JSONPointer?
"method" ... "The default value is "removal" when not provided." ... Why not
always provide "method" (read: no default) in order to avoid confusion
vis-a-vis other fields in a child object of the "redacted" array? Apparently
there is not much space optimization to be gained by not setting this field. If
so, we can do away with the "which is the preferred method" phrase in section
3.1.
Thanks,
Jasdip
[1] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6901
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
