Re: RFC 5733: street changes with contact:update
"Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email protected]> Fri, 15 Nov 2013 11:46:54 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.provreg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <831693C2CDA2E849A7D7A712B24E257F492D5C6D@BRN1WNEXMBX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Klaus Malorny [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, November 15, 2013 4:01 AM > To: Hollenbeck, Scott; Seth Goldman > Cc: IETF Provreg Mailing List > Subject: Re: [provreg] RFC 5733: street changes with contact:update > > On 14.11.2013 19:48, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote: > > I don’t know how one can make a case that sub-element replacement is > acceptable. > > Section 3.2.5 of RFC 5733 says this (emphasis mine): > > > > “The EPP <update> command provides a transform operation that allows > a client to > > modify the attributes of a contact _/object/_.” > > > > and this: > > > > “An OPTIONAL <contact:chg> element that contains _/object attribute > values to be > > changed/_.” > > > > The <update> is thus focused on _/changing/_ the attributes of the > _/object/_. > > In the example Klaus provided, the command received is “replace the > existing > > <contact:postalInfo> attribute with a new instance of > <contact:postalInfo>”. The > > server failed to replace the two <street> elements with the single > element > > provided in the <update>. It shouldn’t work that way. > > > > Scott > > > > Hi Scot, Seth, > > up to now I regarded the name, the organization and the the whole > address block > as the replacable units, derived from the associated XML schema. It > namely > contains two datatypes, "postalInfoType" for the create command and > "chgPostalInfoType" for the update command. The first contains the > <name> and > <addr> elements as mandatory elements, the latter contains them as > optional > elements. If one would consider the postalInfo itself as the replacable > unit, it > would not make sense to enforce the name and address on <create>, but > would > allow to remove them with a following <update> request. > > So simply asked: What does the following schema-wise legal request do? > > <contact:update xmlns:contact="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:contact-1.0"> > <contact:id>C20131114-01</contact:id> > <contact:chg> > <contact:postalInfo type="int"/> > </contact:chg> > </contact:update> > > Does it clear the international contact? Does it leave the > international postal > data simply unchanged (aside from being illegal in Scot's view to > submit a > command that is effectively non-modifying). Does the following command Go back to what I was trying to say yesterday: <chg> means "replace existing with new". So yes, it would change the international postal info to "empty". > <contact:update xmlns:contact="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:contact-1.0"> > <contact:id>C20131114-01</contact:id> > <contact:chg> > <contact:postalInfo type="int"> > <contact:org>ACME Solutions</contact:org> > </contact:postalInfo> > </contact:chg> > </contact:update> > > modify the postal info so that it *solely* contains the organization > and nothing > else afterwards? Assuming all other schema requirements are met, yes. Scott _______________________________________________ provreg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg