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

Yusuke DOI <yusuke.doi@toshiba.co.jp> Wed, 11 April 2012 08:30 UTC

Return-Path: <yusuke.doi@toshiba.co.jp>
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 442A211E814C for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 01:30:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.089
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.089 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001]
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 dhAY+DTqHplk for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 01:30:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imx2.toshiba.co.jp (inet-tsb5.toshiba.co.jp [202.33.96.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CE2611E80BE for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 01:30:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from arc1.toshiba.co.jp ([133.199.194.235]) by imx2.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id q3B8U7fG003874 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:30:07 +0900 (JST)
Received: (from root@localhost) by arc1.toshiba.co.jp id q3B8U7HG005546 for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:30:07 +0900 (JST)
Received: from unknown [133.199.192.144] by arc1.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id TAA05545; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:30:07 +0900
Received: from mx11.toshiba.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ovp2.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id q3B8U6Ft016750 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:30:06 +0900 (JST)
Received: from spiffy21.isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp by toshiba.co.jp id q3B8U6DO024452; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:30:06 +0900 (JST)
Received: from [133.196.16.79] (ncg-dhcp79.isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp [133.196.16.79]) by spiffy21.isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AF2D97CB6; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:30:06 +0900 (JST)
Message-ID: <4F85410D.20802@toshiba.co.jp>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:30:05 +0900
From: Yusuke DOI <yusuke.doi@toshiba.co.jp>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Carine Bournez <carine@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>
In-Reply-To: <20120411075024.GN18899@jay.w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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 08:30:10 -0000

Hi,

(2012-04-11 16:50), Carine Bournez wrote:
> Let me clarify my point: I think defining a +exi suffix for schema-informed
> mode saying "you must specify the form of schemaID that you are using" would
> be a huge mistake. It is (1) not useful, since the EXI 1.0 spec already says
> 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.

Regards,

Yusuke