https://github.com/anewton1998/draft-regext-rdap-extensions/issues/46
>> Section 2.1.1, paragraph 1 >> Some extensions exist to denote the usage of values placed into an IANA >> registry, such as the IANA RDAP registries, or the usage of extensions for >> specifications used in RDAP responses, such as extended vCard/jCard >> properties. Such extensions exist to "mark" these usages and are often >> called "marker" extensions. > Do we really need 2 terms here? profile and marker seem to me very similar in > nature of what they are doing. There is also no reference to any of those > terms in any other place of the document, so this difference does not seem to > matter. [JS] Interesting thought. Firstly, this leads to defining a glossary of terms somewhere to help the reader with a quick comprehension of various concepts/recommendations in this draft. Secondly, we thought there is sufficient distinction between “profile” and “marker” to warrant these “styles” separately. As mentioned above, we will be describing how/when for the identified extension “styles”. [TH] I agree that 'marker' and 'profile' could be combined into a single extension type.
_______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to regext-le...@ietf.org
