Re: PIDF - some things left out of draft

Thanks Paul.

> This is a nit, so feel free to ignore:
> 
> In 
>    "The <status> element contains 0 or 1 OPTIONAL <basic>
>    elements, followed by 0 or more OPTIONAL extension elements
>    from other namespaces."
> 
> isn't the wording "0 or * OPTIONAL" redundant?
> Wouldn't it be just as precise and more concise to say:
> 
>    "The <status> element contains 1 OPTIONAL <basic>
>    element, followed by any number of OPTIONAL extension
>    elements from other namespaces."

Well, this wording sounds better to me. 

Wayne, if you have no problem, I would modify all of such wordings as suggested. 
Okay?


-- Hiroyasu Sugano


> Paul
> 
> "Carr, Wayne" wrote:
> > 
> > your workding sounds good to me.
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Hiroyasu Sugano [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 10:11 PM
> > > To: Carr, Wayne; [email protected]; 'Graham Klyne'; [email protected]
> > > Subject: Re: PIDF - some things left out of draft
> > >
> > >
> > > Wayne,
> > >
> > > Thanks very much for your comments.  Most of the issues 2 and
> > > 3 are reflected
> > > in the coming draft.  I have one comment.
> > >
> > > > Section 4.1.3, the first sentence of the first paragraph
> > > should be changed
> > > > to: "The <status> element contains 0 or 1 OPTIONAL <basic> elements,
> > > > followed by 0 or more OPTIONAL extension elements from
> > > other namespaces."
> > >
> > > This statement seems to allow the <status> element with no
> > > values, which is
> > > not allowed in the present draft.  If we go with this
> > > restriction, the sentence above
> > > would be like:
> > >
> > >   The <status> element contains 0 or 1 OPTIONAL <basic> elements,
> > >   followed by 0 or more OPTIONAL extension elements from
> > > other namespaces,
> > >   under the restriction that at least one child element
> > > appears in the <status>
> > > element.
> > >
> > > If you have better wording, please post it.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > >
> > > -- Hiroyasu Sugano
> > >
> > >
> > 
> >   [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, please]
> 
> 
>   [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, please]
> 
> 



  [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, please]