Re: PCELS draft

Kurt,
> 1) I noticed a number of RFC 2252 schema definitions
> (e.g., pcelsIsMirrored) not accompanied by prose which detailed
> the schema element.  While an RFC 2252 schema definition should
> be provided for each schema element, providing such should not
> be viewed by itself to provide a complete technical
> specification of the schema element.  The prose needs to detail
> all aspects of the schema element, such as application syntax
> and semantics, not covered in the RFC 2252 schema definition.
> It is also good to echo aspects of the RFC 2252 schema definition
> in the prose.
>

The lack of prose at various elements is due to the fact that the prose is 
written down in the Information Model (RFC 3460). We don't feel like 
duplicating all of it.

Marcus