Re: -model structure Re: LC model draft draft-ietf-forces-model-07.txt

I would like to hear from other people on this.  Back when the design 
team was working on the model, we went back and forth on this question.
We could move the Schema, the FE Object LFB Class definition and the 
example class definition to an appendix.
I am concerned that moving the Class definitions would make the text 
much harder to follow.
Yours,
Joel M. Halpern

At 12:29 PM 10/27/2006, tom.petch wrote:
>Reading -model, I found I wanted to refer to the Schema and the FEObject LFB
>Class repeatedly and so pulled them out into a separate document 
>(adding in the
>LFB Class from -protocol).  I think this will be a common requirement and that
>at the least, they should be appendices.  If, as seems likely, their rate of
>change in the early years of ForCES is at a different rate to that of the rest
>of -model, then there is a case for making them a separate document, 
>along with
>any other non-example XML parts of -model.
>
>Tom Petch
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Patrick Droz" <[email protected]>
>To: <[email protected]>
>Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 10:36 AM
>Subject: LC model draft draft-ietf-forces-model-07.txt
>
>
> > I would like to issue last call on the model draft. As this is
> > a fairly large document the LC will last for 3 weeks and will
> > therefore end just before the next IETF. It is draft:
> > draft-ietf-forces-model-07.txt
> > and can be found at:
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-forces-model-07.txt
> >
> > A number of people have indicated that if the document is in
> > LC they would thoroughly review the document. I hope people will
> > stick to their promises.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Patrick
> >
> >
> >