As an action item from the REGEXT WG meeting yesterday, I’m including my proposal for handling the EPP RFC 5733 <contact:postalInfo> element on an update:
1. The <contact:chg> sub-elements do have replace semantics a. Existing sub-element data deleted first and then set with updated data. b. This includes the <contact:postalInfo>, <contact:voice>, <contact:fax>, <contact:email>, <contact:authInfo>, and the <contact:disclose> elements. 2. The typed <contact:postalInfo> elements (“int” or “loc”) are treated independently a. Exclusion of a <contact:postalInfo> type (“int” or “loc”) does not implicitly delete it 3. The typed <contact:postalInfo> element (“int” or “loc”) is deleted explicitly via an empty element a. <contact:postalInfo type=”int”/> or <contact:postalInfo type=”loc”/> Please comment on the proposal to help clarify the interpretation of EPP RFC 5733. Thanks, — JG [cid:image001.png@01D2A9FD.3F439760] James Gould Distinguished Engineer jgo...@verisign.com 703-948-3271 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 VerisignInc.com<http://verisigninc.com/>
_______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
