Re: [XCON] Should we keep or adjust some of the redundant text in common-data-model?

["Richard L. Barnes" <[e-mail]>]

> What does the group think?
> 
> My 2cents - I agree with the principle behind Pete's suggestion, and I think my first read of the document would have
> been smoother without sections like 4.2.2. I think the opportunity for error introduced by drift as the
> documents are maintained is very low, but the editorial effort to avoid that risk is also very low.
> I am less convinced that the introductory material is redundant and think the coupling with, for instance,
> 5239 is maintainable going forward.

This seems sensible.  This document doesn't need to re-describe what's in RFC 4575 already, just the extension elements.  It would probably be good, though, to add a note to the first paragraph of S4.2 to say something like
"
The XCON data model re-uses the following child elements from RFC 4575:
  o <display-text>
  o <subject>
  o <free-text>
  o ...
"

--Richard