On Mon, Apr 16, 2018, at 16:19, Gould, James wrote:
>     On Fri, Apr 13, 2018, at 15:09, Gould, James wrote:
>     > I made the proposal for the optional "standard" attribute with the 
> list 
>     > message 
>     > 
> (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/7E6X5xCdt3DhqL7p7CFupm9bAAY/?qid=e4f712bc8e70e4d0a458971928924651)
>  
>     > on the thread with Pat Moroney.  
>     
>     Yes, but that was not included in the document and noone replied to your
>     request for thoughts.
> 
> There were plenty of responses on the thread to the request for 
> thoughts.  See Pat Moroney's response that is next in the thread 
> (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/ftCDAgAQMyXDPPbvKYN3px5cG_Y).  

Sorry I trusted the web interface of the archive, and it does not display 
threads nicely. I should have trusted by own email client instead.
 
>     The fact that there is a need to change the schema at the last time 
> clearly
>     shows to me that something is half-baked and should not be shipped as is.
>  
> Do you support the inclusion of the "standard" attribute

I do not and said so in the past:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/HY1aRTOvT0om6IL4vP6EgBoQaT4/?qid=46a1b6e6f1f01ab50b68a5f44c48f5cf

I think its addition only create more complexity without a real use case.

The fact that it has no clear definition in the current draft seem to prove 
that.

> There is no need for the client to specify the "standard" attribute in 
> the check command.  

It is the way it is currently defined.

The proponents of having it in the client request should maybe say something.

But I see no more reasons to have it in a reply: class=standard already
conveys the meaning.

In short, if someone cares for this, in the client request and/or in server 
reply, they should provide specific and detailed definition in the document.
If there is noone willing to define this element clearly in the specification, 
I think it means that it need to be removed altogether.

-- 
  Patrick Mevzek
  p...@dotandco.com

_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Reply via email to