Re: [MODEL] Resolutions to nouns describing LFB class definitions?

Jamal Hadi Salim <[email protected]> Fri, 5 Jan 2007 11:06:14 -0500
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.forces
Organization ZNYX Networks
Message-ID <1168013174.5216.114.camel@jzny2>
Thanks Tom. I know Joel has it under control but i've just put this
discussion in the tracker (issue #103) so it is not forgotten when
people get busyed out.

cheers,
jamal

On Fri, 2007-05-01 at 08:57 +0100, tom.petch wrote:
> Jamal
> 
> There was general agreement that using the same terms as had technical meaning
> in XML was likely to cause confusion but there was no consensus on what to
> replace the ones in -model with.
> 
> Tom Petch
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jamal Hadi Salim" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 5:40 PM
> Subject: [MODEL] Resolutions to nouns describing LFB class definitions?
> 
> 
> > Joel,
> >
> > There was a discussion with Tom a while back on the naming conventions
> > of LFB attributes and their properties so we avoid conflicting with
> > the XML definitions ...
> > I cant find anything on the tracker - what was the resolution? As i
> > begin scouring section 4 i am finding it unsettling as well.
> >
> > Can you open a tracker on the change or respond to this and i will.
> >
> > cheers,
> > jamal