Re: [VCARDDAV] KIND:device

[Joe Marcus Clarke <[e-mail]>]

On 1/11/12 2:01 PM, Simon Perreault wrote:
> On 01/11/2012 01:38 PM, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
>> On 1/11/12 9:51 AM, Simon Perreault wrote:
>>> On 01/09/2012 12:14 PM, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
>>>> We did add UID as a holder for serial number.
>>>
>>> I'd be careful with that idea. What tells a vCard consumer that the UID
>>> property also happens to contain a serial number? Seems like pointless
>>> overloading to me. Better just create a new serial number property. It's
>>> free, you know... ;)
>>
>> I do.  I was arguing that a "unique identifier" for a device would
>> likely be a serial number since that is burned into the device.  Gonzalo
>> and I were debating this further and I'm coming around to provisioning a
>> serial number property vs. overloading UID.  But since UID can hold a
>> text value like this, it would be legal to do a serial number here,
>> right?
> 
> I'm not sure you understood my point.
> 
> Yes it would be *legal* for the UID property to hold a serial number.
> 
> The problem I'm thinking of would arise if, in *any* circumstance, you
> try to *interpret* the UID property as a serial number, or you try to
> *extract* a serial number from it. If you don't want to do that, fine,
> but then I'd still be curious as to why a randomly-generated UUID
> wouldn't be easier.

I got the point.  I was getting clarification in my last sentence, but
the overall message is that I agree it would be better to use a new
property that would be specific to serial number.  In that way, one
would know that they are reading a serial number and a UUID could still
be used as a way of grouping devices in, say, group vCards.

Joe

> 
> Simon


-- 
Joe Marcus Clarke, CCIE #5384,         |          |
SCJP, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, VCP        |||||      |||||
Distinguished Support Engineer  ..:|||||||||::|||||||||:..
Phone: [phone]         c i s c o  S y s t e m s
Email: [e-mail]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------