[Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-additional-data-14: Naming consistency of various parameters / namespaces

[Matt Serra <[e-mail]>]

In reviewing the latest additional data draft (v14) - I noticed that there are a few inconsistencies that should be addressed.  Issues and thoughts are below.  

I ask that whatever is decided recognize that other forms of additional data will be defined (Additional Caller and Additional Location data), so we should pick names that don't limit our options when those are introduced.

1) Section 9.2 - The purpose parameter in the table should read as 'emergencyCallData' per the section title.

2) Section 9.4 - We may want to reconsider renaming the MIME registrations to match the purpose parameter name.  Section 9.4 calls for a pattern of 'emergencyCallData.<block>+xml'

3) Section 9.5: the various URN Sub-Namespace registrations are named inconsistently.  We should iron this out:

- urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:emergencyCallAddlData
- urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:emergencyCallProviderInfo
- urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:emergencyCall.SvcInfo
- urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:emergencyCall.DevInfo
- urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:emergencyCall.SubInfo
- urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:emergencyCall.Comment

4) The schema registries in section 9.6 are different still from section 9.5. These should agree, no?

Thanks,

Matthew A. Serra, ENP
Sr. Director, Product Management 
Rave Mobile Safety | Smart911
Mobile:  [phone]
[e-mail]