IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [paws] XML schema versus JSON, vCard & iCal

Robert Smith <royersoftwareandservices@gmail.com> Thu, 23 August 2012 20:57 UTC

Return-Path: <royersoftwareandservices@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: paws@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: paws@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA84A21F84FD for <paws@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 13:57:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ep7iZrkJrvgk for <paws@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 13:57:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com (mail-pb0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A99621F8448 for <paws@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 13:57:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pbbrr4 with SMTP id rr4so2110139pbb.31 for <paws@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 13:57:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=QbV9ii3+6cMcpkQsbHelYPXSvhubqCjW7Xfu8EFAShw=; b=gfU8dzLJ6fFjVzGvGJRMfHFK5DqHMwYleZmzjnQoFSTuuOt5lRNe0cJXQz7iyT2X27 J3G90i9x91mCgUNI0VDFDUeIqVf5Je9D8pYNjpYOLQjlujoE5mvlH+n6EI6oXA2k5qbH jvTYLRsOON4r+sJ8pSQqHMbODPl7XLpcq20sDVMmqF4UP3rV0zpT0mDKoYs/r/YgJ0TT p1xG0FVOeOOE15jUmlhoxUSOGErHZKYAejjohGAaWMqAeaaWZDWRSK7S3bVP/KnyvLXY VJH5r7jUh/U0ZyJ6Y+hC9jT9MI8qqYjTX63CnBGOqsYsRfTanXtz+AqS+8Rfr1Mlk4+y XmHQ==
Received: by 10.68.224.161 with SMTP id rd1mr7652241pbc.133.1345755461042; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 13:57:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.15.4] (184-76-96-188.war.clearwire-wmx.net. [184.76.96.188]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id io1sm6687247pbc.67.2012.08.23.13.57.39 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 23 Aug 2012 13:57:40 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <50369943.1050706@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 14:57:39 -0600
From: Robert Smith <royersoftwareandservices@gmail.com>
Organization: Software and Services
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120714 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: paws@ietf.org
References: <1345171058.97121.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <CC53BAB1.B014%brian.rosen@neustar.biz> <C5C3BB522B1DDF478AA09545169155B43BE42492@SZXEML519-MBX.china.huawei.com> <CABEV9RNyZqyRSpT4mtGe4VumRNmzaMivtueEFqcjRa=3uGAvSA@mail.gmail.com> <8375F6DAEFB09F48815203F1FE23B797117AA6D8CF@shelby> <AAC987F0CC2C7845A9FBD8A36D52E12D954986@rrc-ats-exmb1> <1ECAFF543A2FED4EA2BEB6CACE08E47601FB5DBC@008-AM1MPN1-006.mgdnok.nokia.com> <8375F6DAEFB09F48815203F1FE23B797117AA6D9E1@shelby> <50367EE8.4080106@blindcreek.com> <8375F6DAEFB09F48815203F1FE23B797117AA6D9ED@shelby> <5963DDF1F751474D8DEEFDCDBEE43AE716E283EC@dfweml512-mbx.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <5963DDF1F751474D8DEEFDCDBEE43AE716E283EC@dfweml512-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [paws] XML schema versus JSON, vCard & iCal
X-BeenThere: paws@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Protocol to Access White Space database \(PAWS\)" <paws.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/paws>, <mailto:paws-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/paws>
List-Post: <mailto:paws@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:paws-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws>, <mailto:paws-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 20:57:42 -0000

In my experience with the IETF at the final levels of RFC acceptance 
they reject duplicate implementations of objects or protocols. We tried 
that with CALSCH, (xml and iCal/vCard format).

They rejected it in both formats. We had to pick only one. In a separate 
draft that never went
to RFC status we proposed a translation guide (iCal data translation 
to/from XML). However
only one could be the 'standard' format.

I mostly just follow this WG. I would suggest that the WG leads check 
with the IETF to make sure that they will accept a specification that 
has 2 formats for the same data.

-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email