Re: [precis] Belated WGLC Comments on draft-ietf-precis-nickname-15

[Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <[e-mail]>]

On 2/25/15 7:09 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
> On 25 Feb 2015, at 19:53, Peter Saint-Andre - &yet wrote:
>
>> On 2/25/15 4:51 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
>>> (Apologies again for a belated WGLC review. Please feel free to ignore
>>> this if it's become moot.)
>>>
>>>
>>> I think this is basically done, and I support it's publication. I only
>>> have one comment:
>>>
>>> - Table 2, last row:
>>>
>>> I did not find a proscription against zero length strings in the text,
>>> other than a comment that applications can set minimum and maximum
>>> sizes. It's quite possible I missed it. Or is this is a property of the
>>> FreeFormClass? (For comparison, I note that the saslprepbis draft
>>> explicitly forbids zero length strings.)
>>
>> Yes, it would be good to add a rule about that. I find it difficult to
>> think of an instance where a zero-length string makes sense within
>> PRECIS, but we don't prohibit them in the framework so we'll need to
>> do that in each profile. Something for profile authors to pay
>> attention to (and, unfortunately, forget to address).
>
> I'm neutral as to whether the profile needs to outlaw zero length
> strings or leave that to the application. My point wasn't that I think
> we need the rule, it was that the table assumes the rule.

True. But I do think that a zero-length nickname makes no sense.

Peter

P.S. I'm sorry that this work has held up draft-ietf-simple-chat for so 
long!