Re: [Lager] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-lager-specification-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

["Asmus Freytag (c)" <[e-mail]>]

On 4/29/2016 3:05 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> Hi Asmus,
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016, at 08:58 PM, Asmus Freytag (c) wrote:
>> Following on our discussion by e-mail, here is suggested wording.
>> A./
>> On 4/21/2016 3:24 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>>> (1) section 5: this says code points MUST be 4 hex digits.
>>> What is s/w supposed to do if it sees only 2 hex digits?
>>> Should it ignore the range or char element or fail to process
>>> the entire LGR document? I think the same issue applies to
>>> other uses of 2119 language as well, (e.g. "MUST be treated as
>>> an error at the end of p19), so I'd recommend you state some
>>> kind of general rule if you can.
>> One would expect the schema validator to catch such issues.
>> It's a simple matter to in to provide explicit language in Section 4 
>> that an LGR that does not conform to the schema in Appendix D is to 
>> be rejected.
> Please say so explicitly.

New text. (Compared to draft 11, the second half of the first sentence 
and the last sentence are new).
------------------------------------------------------------------------


  4. <#rfc.section.4>LGR Format

An LGR is expressed as a well-formed XML Document[XML] <#XML>that 
conforms to the schema defined inAppendix Appendix D <#schema>.

As XML is case-sensitive, an LGR must be authored with the correct 
casing. For example, the XML element names MUST be in lower case as 
described in this specification, and matching of attribute values, is 
only performed in a case-sensitive manner.

A document that is not well-formed, non-conforming or violates other 
constraints specified in this specification MUST be rejected.


------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think this makes it abundantly clear that the spec does not condone 
"guessing".

A./