RE: [Policy] draft-reyes-policy-core-ext-schema-01.txt

["Pana, Mircea" <[e-mail]>]

> I question whether it is absolutely necessary to mark the several
> components from PCLS as "OBSOLETE". I realize that PCIMe describes
> these as "deprecated". But the "OBSOLETE" designation is harsh. It
> implies that a Directory implementation may not simultaneously
> support both PCLS and PCELS. I don't see any naming clashes between
> PCLS and PCELS, so why mark the PCLS components as OBSOLETE?

You are right, it is not *absolutely* necessary to mark the deprecated
schema items as "OBSOLETE". The "OBSOLETE" mechanism has been chosen as a
way to formalize the restriction for PCELS information trees not to (SHOULD
NOT) contain any of the deprecated PCLS items. In other words, PCELS and
PCLS information trees SHOULD be disjunctive. This restriction originates
from the desire to avoid backward compatibility issues for PCELS-only
compliant applications ;-)

PCLS schema items marked as "OBSOLETE" in subschema subentries governing
specific PCELS administrative areas indicate that instances of such schema
items are to be ignored. Implementations that do not support subschema
subentries and specific administrative areas may ignore the "OBSOLETE"
statements in the schema definitions but should have these restrictions
enforced by other means.

Regards,
Mircea.