Re: [netmod] IETF WG state changed for draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis

[Randy Presuhn <[e-mail]>]

Hi -

On 2022-04-07 12:13 AM, Jürgen Schönwälder wrote:
...
> given recent discussions around ip addresses, I am not sure about the
> consensus and perhaps we should consider to name the new date and time
> types differently, e.g.
> 
>    date -> date-with-zone
>    date-no-zone -> date
>    time -> time-with-zone
>    time-no-zone -> time
> 
> to avoid similar discussions in the future and to adopt a naming style
> where optional elements are reflected in the name instead of using a
> naming style where the absence of optional parts is reflected in the
> name.

That's a reasonable rationale, and might even make a good CLR if
adopted from the very beginning, but given the ability of model
designers to read too much (or too little) into names,
perhaps one might consider the possibility of eliminating this
particular source of confusion altogether?

     date -> date-with-zone
     date-no-zone -> date-no-zone
     time -> time-with-zone
     time-no-zone -> time-no-zone

Randy