Subject: [Ltru] Proposed file-level "Description" field (was: Re: [psg.com #1099] WGLC add empty extension registry)

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 07:32:30 -0700

Randy Presuhn <randy underscore presuhn at mindspring dot com> wrote:

> I disagree.  Section 3.6 says "[t]his registry MUST use the record-jar
> format described by the ABNF in Section 3.1."  That would give it a
> File-Date record.

Kent Karlsson <kentk at cs dot chalmers dot se> replied:

> Not directly by the ABNF, but by the text following it.

I agree with Kent.  The ABNF doesn't say anything about a File-Date
record.

Kent continued:

> Since I like the file self declarations, I would suggest to
> make the following text replacement, with obvious consequences:
> ...
> The first record in the file SHALL contain two fields whose field-
> names are "File-Date" and "Description". The field-body of the "File-
> Date" field of this record SHALL contain the last modification date of
> this copy of the registry. This makes it possible to compare different
> versions of the registry. The registry on the IANA website is the most
> current. Versions with an older date than that one are not up-to-date.
> The field-body of the "Description" field SHALL contain a short
> comment on what the content of the registry is. For example,
>
> File-Date: 2004-06-28
> Description: IANA Language subtag registry (see RFC XXXX)

For reasons specific to my implementation, I don't like using
"Description" for both the file-level description shown here and the
record-level description we already have.  But the implementation can be
changed easily.  That's not a big deal.

I would say, "The field-body of the "Description" field SHALL contain a
short description of the contents of the registry."

> This would then apply to both registries. (Maybe some other sentence
> needs to be amended too.) Note the introduction of the "SHALL"s above,
> to make it proper standardese.

Definitely, any such change would need to apply to both registries.

--
Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: "Randy Presuhn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:20:31 -0700

Hi -

As a technical contributor,

> From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
> To: "LTRU Working Group" <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 7:32 AM
> Subject: [Ltru] Proposed file-level "Description" field (was: Re: [psg.com#1099] WGLC add empty extension registry)
...
...

To avoid confusing humans, and not just tools, perhaps "File-Description"
would make sense.

Randy