Draft: draft-ietf-sipping-media-policy-dataset-04
Reviewer: Jari Urpalainen [jari.urpalainen@nokia.com]
Review Date: 26 June 2007 (XML schema review)
Review Deadline: 11 June 2007
Status: WGLC
Summary: This draft is on the right track for publication and has nits that need to be fixed before publication.
Comments:
---------
I've looked at the schemas, so some comments. So this i-d depends on
profile-datasets and the base schema defined there, i.e. it is not
possible to give comments based solely on this i-d. The biggest issues
are with extensions. So i had to revamp the base schema in uaprof quite
a bit (changed chemas and examples are available at
). And i don't claim
these were _ready_ but at least the examples validate.
So in uaprof I removed and
and added a liberal extension point
for combine="interleave" definitions (to be used
in additional schemas that include the base schema). The model is
similar to one used in
.
allows easy forwards and backwards compatible
schemas and the including schemas can restrict this extension point
easily if they so desire (because of e.g. deterministic and unambiguous
schemas...). At least is still missing from
this schema as it is referenced from policy-dataset.
In policy-dataset I added "PolicyGeneralAttributes" definition because
it was used in several places. "AttributeMediaType" definition is also
missing, maybe it should be in uaprof. "AttributeGenericAttributes" is
defined by "AttributeGeneric" in uaprof. These attribute extensions are
somewhat tricky in relaxng as there may _not_ be overlapping
definitions, but fortunately relaxng allows a very flexible but somewhat
verbose extensions with rule. Then there were some cardinality
bugs in containers. Examples didn't include xml declarations and
elements were not namespace qualified. The document root element in
uaprof is . "ElementQoSDSCP" did have typos in references.
Also I'm not thrilled with the convention where in section 4.1 and in
the relaxng schema, the same content model is being described, this
easily leads to conflicts, one example being that has no
extension point in the schema (i could propose a liberal one, btw., as
relaxng does _not_ have an annoying UPA constraint ;-)). The same
applies to , section 5.1.
There might be a preference for using the compact format of relaxng, so
one could issue rnc schema as normative and perhaps rng in an appendix
as informative. btw. trang is capable of converting e.g. from rng to rnc.