IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-shelby-exi-registration-01.txt

Carine Bournez <carine@w3.org> Wed, 11 April 2012 08:59 UTC

Return-Path: <carine@jay.w3.org>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C117F21F85B1 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 01:59:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pgrjv7mqBfZo for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 01:59:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from jay.w3.org (ssh.w3.org [128.30.52.60]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4159E21F85AC for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 01:59:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from carine by jay.w3.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <carine@jay.w3.org>) id 1SHtOa-0007ET-43; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 04:59:20 -0400
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 04:59:20 -0400
From: Carine Bournez <carine@w3.org>
To: Yusuke DOI <yusuke.doi@toshiba.co.jp>
Message-ID: <20120411085920.GP18899@jay.w3.org>
References: <20120329204732.13711.266.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5580A282-E191-4962-9410-6CF9FB14EDFC@sensinode.com> <20120402124522.GX16698@jay.w3.org> <8B84EAAD-CD22-4461-9BC6-AB78974A94A2@sensinode.com> <20120411075024.GN18899@jay.w3.org> <4F85410D.20802@toshiba.co.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4F85410D.20802@toshiba.co.jp>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-shelby-exi-registration-01.txt
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 08:59:24 -0000

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 05:30:05PM +0900, Yusuke DOI wrote:
>> you have to define schemaID for your application, (2) harmful, since it tries
>> to redefine the mechanism for options that is already defined in EXI 1.0,
>> at least for the schema-informed mode.
>
> I cannot understand (some of) your point. I think EXI spec does not define any 'mechanism for options' according to schemaId definition. The EXI spec (in schema-informed mode) is useful only if decoders know the running application a priori.


Rephrasing: the EXI 1.0 spec has a mechanism to tell the other end that
schema-informed mode is in use, and the EXI 1.0 spec says that the 
application level has to take care of defining the form of schemaID.


-- 
Carine Bournez -+- W3C Europe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email