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

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

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.
 
>
>  "An LGR is expressed as a well-formed XML Document <xref
>  target="XML"/> that conforms to the schema defined in <xref
>  target="schema"/>."
>
>  Then we only need to discuss any instances of constraints that are
>  not enforced/enforceable by schema validation, and we do that, where
>  those are discussed.
 
+1.
 
I scanned the rest of your proposed changes and they look reasonable to
me. Please post an updated draft ASAP.