Sorry missed a couple in previous reply.
Christian Hopps writes:
Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker writes:
Section 5.1.2
The following subsection suggests that there is a "heading" field in the
W3C structure/API, but I don't see one listed in Figure 1.
Yes, there was even a blank line
Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker writes:
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-netmod-geo-location-08: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
Francesca Palombini via Datatracker writes:
Francesca Palombini has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-netmod-geo-location-08: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut
Roman Danyliw via Datatracker writes:
--
DISCUSS:
--
** Section 3. leaf astronomical-body. The content of this field appears to be
"An astronomical body as
Martin Duke via Datatracker writes:
--
COMMENT:
--
(2.2) "For the standard location choice latitude and longitude are specified as
fractions of decimal
John Scudder via Datatracker writes:
Nits:
I think this document has the fewest nits per page of any document I’ve ever
reviewed (kudos!), but there are still a few.
I believe I have benefited by being an early tester for Rob Wilton's automated
grammar checker. :)
I've fixed the
GDPR uses the term 'personal data' and I assume for many leafs in a
data model the answer whether a leaf is 'personal data' is not simple
to answer given that also data items belong to 'personal data' if they
combined with other information can identify a natural person.
For example, is an IPv6
Hello Carsten,
As I see we need a way to mark some data (schema nodes) as personal data. I am
looking for such a mechanism. Do you see the need for that too?
The goal is to allow special handling for such data.
- Leaf aaa is general data it can be log and stored forever
- Leaf bbb is marked as
On 2021-05-26, at 11:49, Balázs Lengyel
wrote:
>
> Hello,
> Netconf/Restconf can transfer a lot of data. Some of this data can be
> personal/private like end-user names, personal phone records, street
> addresses. Is there a way to marks such data as private? I am thinking about
> something
Hello,
Netconf/Restconf can transfer a lot of data. Some of this data can be
personal/private like end-user names, personal phone records, street
addresses. Is there a way to marks such data as private? I am thinking about
something like putting a YANG extension in the data models:
extension
10 matches
Mail list logo
