IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lager] Next Steps for LAGER

Yoshiro YONEYA <yoshiro.yoneya@jprs.co.jp> Fri, 26 February 2016 05:35 UTC

Return-Path: <yoshiro.yoneya@jprs.co.jp>
X-Original-To: lager@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lager@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76F6D1A90AB for <lager@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Feb 2016 21:35:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 3.101
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, J_CHICKENPOX_35=0.6, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.006, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wuvY_6dI2W1a for <lager@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Feb 2016 21:35:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from off-send01.osa.jprs.co.jp (off-send01.osa.jprs.co.jp [IPv6:2001:218:3001:17::10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF0C91A90AA for <lager@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Feb 2016 21:35:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from off-sendsmg01.osa.jprs.co.jp (off-sendsmg01.osa.jprs.co.jp [172.23.8.61]) by off-send01.osa.jprs.co.jp (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u1Q5ZJ7t021087 for <lager@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 14:35:19 +0900
Received: from off-sendsmg01.osa.jprs.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss71 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D1C41800AB for <lager@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 14:35:19 +0900 (JST)
Received: from NOTE701 (off-cpu04.osa.jprs.co.jp [172.23.4.14]) by off-sendsmg01.osa.jprs.co.jp (Postfix) with SMTP id 6D3F6180062 for <lager@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 14:35:18 +0900 (JST)
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 14:35:17 +0900
From: Yoshiro YONEYA <yoshiro.yoneya@jprs.co.jp>
To: lager@ietf.org
Message-Id: <20160226143517.c653e74de165522e5dd90ce0@jprs.co.jp>
In-Reply-To: <66C5B5E0-7806-46D9-B7BF-E6BD908179A2@viagenie.ca>
References: <831693C2CDA2E849A7D7A712B24E257F4A36F1A0@BRN1WNEXMBX02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> <66C5B5E0-7806-46D9-B7BF-E6BD908179A2@viagenie.ca>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.0 (GTK+ 2.24.23; i686-pc-mingw32)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1690-8.0.0.1202-22156.005
X-TM-AS-Result: No--22.526-5.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--22.526-5.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: hj0BWi2U9K5ITndh1lLRAe5i6weAmSDKGcfGM6EiL4aqvcIF1TcLYCG6 /1cZ3ZJyDYn5PiWdugWahmJHr7WuevlXbaRPf/X2sBytgTF4TTQ08abclI0aFt9RlPzeVuQQqF+ W1M0kGT8MqzG+4JMJw1lPLMFx61SvuM88t3F5VSpwUSK4/EeOxXOKOUMFh4P8ACF5TKaad1+XCK WcPDEX61dRieiYSRpUQwajvXH0YB/VDAMEwzgZ7BVXx+49zfW3QrO4XR6BRQPWhD2uHqL5RucDD zKnTzUsN+QrOGW2XUz8QBEKz7fDorYpml+YngKl7BI2Kjvg8mhkBDPLxNH5BoKwF4K/wIz97hK9 01+mC+ARW3Fo+hK3sB5hmP6OM/PJTX7PJ/OU3vL+xOhjarOnHjDOIqGspeLdedU6lNdjG9rpaGI M46J67JBlLa6MK1y4
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lager/kN-awyrqDXXSEBlnjMnhdQwpYxs>
Subject: Re: [Lager] Next Steps for LAGER
X-BeenThere: lager@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Label Generation Rules <lager.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lager>, <mailto:lager-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lager/>
List-Post: <mailto:lager@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lager-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lager>, <mailto:lager-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 05:35:22 -0000

> <no hat>Given that almost everything is now developed using JSON instead 
> of XML, it would be much better to have a clear specification on how to 
> implement the XML-JSON-XML mapping, instead of everyone having his own 
> interpretation of the mapping. Vcard-xcard-jcard was done similarly.

+1

-- 
Yoshiro YONEYA <yoshiro.yoneya@jprs.co.jp>

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 08:04:25 -0500 "Marc Blanchet" <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca> wrote:

> On 22 Feb 2016, at 7:52, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
> 
> > Thinking ahead a bit...
> >
> > First, we won't be meeting at IETF-95. We don't have anything to do 
> > that compels us to meet in person. That's a good thing!
> >
> > Our charter currently has only one milestone: complete 
> > draft-ietf-lager-specification by December 2015. We missed the date, 
> > but that document is almost ready for submission to the IESG. Once 
> > it's finished we can declare victory and close this WG, but first we 
> > should ask ourselves if there's more work to do.
> >
> > One thought is that we could consider adding a new milestone to our 
> > charter if we have an identified work item and WG consensus to do more 
> > work. I'm aware of another Internet-Draft that might be appropriate 
> > for us to work on:
> >
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-schiltknecht-lgr-json/
> >
> > This document is currently expired. Once the XML-based LAGER 
> > specification has been completed it should be relatively easy to 
> > document a complementary JSON specification that is derived from, and 
> > consistent with, the XML specification.
> >
> > Does this (or anything else) sound interesting to anyone?
> 
> <no hat>Given that almost everything is now developed using JSON instead 
> of XML, it would be much better to have a clear specification on how to 
> implement the XML-JSON-XML mapping, instead of everyone having his own 
> interpretation of the mapping. Vcard-xcard-jcard was done similarly.
> 
> Marc.
> 
> > If not, should we conclude our work when 
> > draft-ietf-lager-specification is finished?
> >
> > Scott
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Lager mailing list
> > Lager@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lager

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email