I think the idea has merit.

Am I correct in implying that the "sensitivity" would differ from say
the classification attributed to a particular reference document?

I effectively include a "sensitivity" measure in the AERO-ML data files
I create using a "variableDef", but a more formal approach may provide
better consistency when exchanging datasets. Similarly for the

In addition to 'name/type', would it be worth having 'refID' and
'description' attributes associated with licence and sensitivity (or
what ever they may become)?

Geoff Brian

-----Original Message-----
From: Jon S. Berndt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Saturday, 23 September 2006 12:30 PM
Subject: Suggestion for Aero-ML

I believe it would be desirable to have a text field in AERO-ML to
specify a license for the file, and also to have a field for specifying
the sensitivity (secret, classified, proprietary, etc.).

I suppose that the license field could look like this:

<license name="GNU GPL"/>


<license name="GNU GPL">
  For more information, see www.gnu.org/gpl </license>

I expect that the sensitivity field would simply be something like:

<sensitivity type="proprietary"/>


<sensitivity type="proprietary">
  This file should only be distributed in accordance with company policy


Jon Berndt

Reply via email to