Re: [NGO] NETMOD charter

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ngo-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ngo-bounces@ietf.org] On 
> Behalf Of Andy Bierman
> 
> We have also been using XSD for the canonical XML syntax 
> representation in protocol documents for quite some time.
> I strong object to changing this policy to RelaxNG or DSDL 
> without IETF Approval first.
> 
> 

Allow me to express shortly my view as a contributor. 

I do not believe that we deal here with a change in policy. The
canonical XML syntax representation stays with us as the 'on the wire'
interoperability level. We are introducing an operator-friendly language
that is described by Randy in his preliminary charter draft and the
mapping between the operator-friendly level and the XML. These would be
the mandatory-to-implement elements of the framework

We also recognize that there is a place for a machine-friendly
representation that would accommodate existing tools and allow for
import of existing XML schemes already defined by other WGs in the IETF
or other SDOs, in RelaxNG or DSDL or other. Mappings between the
operator-friendly language and RelaxNG or DSDL would be optional, but at
least one of them will be a loss-less translation. 

See the below. I am not too strong in ASCII art, maybe somebody can
help. 

---------------------------
|Operator Friendly |
---------------------------
|
|  |  |
|    |    |
|      |      |
|        |        |
|          |         |
|  --------------  -----------
| | RelaxNG| | DSDL|
|  --------------  ----------
|          |         |
|        |         |
|      |       |
|    |      |
-------------
|  XML   |
-------------

Does this make sense? 

Dan
_______________________________________________
NGO mailing list
NGO@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ngo