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.