Subject: [Simple] Comments and NITs on draft-ietf-simple-rpid-03

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 7 May 2004 17:15:28 +0300

[not as a WG chair]

Comments
=========

Section 4.2
-----------

- "Depending on the presentity intent, all but the "permanent-absence"
   indication can be used with either status OPEN or CLOSED."  Should this be normative text?

- Why does this section emphasize that automata is the target? Users can manually set those activities as well.

- What if I have an appointment but didn't go or I have a holiday but still came to the office? Do we need text explaining that this info might be wrong if it gets pulled automatically from a calendar?

- Need to mention that more than one activity can be specified at one time. Eg: I can be on holiday and be having a meal and travelling at the same time.

- I don't understand the text that describes the need for <activity> element and how it relates to <activities> element. Can yo ure-write those paragraphs with simpler clearer text? can you have <activities> without <activity> elements?

Section 4.5
-----------

- "The <idle> element SHOULD be included in the presence document if the idle time exceeds a user-setable threshold" Should that be:

"The <idle> element SHOULD be included in the presence document only if the idle time exceeds a user-settable threshold"

or

"The <idle> element SHOULD be included in the presence document if the idle time exceeds a user-setable threshold an MAY be included otherwise"

- "Configuration MUST include the option to omit the timestamp." What timestamp? How is it related to Idle? More text is needed.

Section 4.7
------------

- 3rd paragraph talks about privacy value of "quiet". That confused me and might confuse others. Perhaps removing the paragraph all together might be safer.

Section 4.8
------------

- "The <contact> element for tuples labeled with a relationship can
   contain either a communication URI such as "im", "sip"/"sips",
   "h323", "tel" or "mailto", or a presence URI, such as "pres" or
   "sip"."

How is that different from <contact> with no <relationship>?

Section 6
----------

- XMLSpy did not like <xs:extension base="tokenlist">. I changed it to <xs:extension base="xs:NMTOKENS">. That worked for this part, but then it complained about <xs:attributeGroup ref="SinceUntil"/> so I gave up :) Both complains where that the schema is not valid in that the values "tokenlist" and "SinceUntil" are undefined. I don't know why it was complaining. I therefore couldn't validate the example. Have you?

NITS
====

Abstract
--------

- I think the abstract should start with the same or similar sentence the scope starts with "The Presence Information Data Format (PIDF) defines a basic format for representing presence information for a presentity"

- Change "(RPID) adds elements to the Presence Information Data Format (PIDF)" to "(RPID) is an extension that adds elements to the PIDF"

- typle -> type

Section 1.
----------

- Change "The Presence Information Data Format (PIDF) defines a basic format for representing presence information for a presentity" to "The Presence Information Data Format (PIDF) [REF] defines a basic XML [REF] format for representing presence information for a presentity"

- You talk about "PIDF document" and this document. Change "this document" to "this memo" and "PIDF document" to "PIDF XML document" just to avoid confusion.

Section 3
---------

- Add reference after "PIDF" in "PIDF describes the basic ..."

Section 4.2
-----------

-  "The <activity> element MAY be qualified with the 'since' and 'until' attributes as described in Section 4." Should that say "The <activities> element ..."?

- Choses -> chooses

Section 4.5
------------

- setable -> settable

Section 4.6
------------

- powerplant -> power plant

- maglev??

- "(Section Section 7)" -> "(Section 7)"

- Provide a token list example for <placetype>

Section 4.8
------------

- "If a relationship is indicated, the RPID <status> values describe the <contact>, not the presentity." You need text before this sentence saying that the contact element has the URI of the person the tuple is describing, not the URI on the presentity itself.

- "sip"/"sips" -> "sip", "sips".

Section 4.9
-----------

- "For tuples representing multiple physical devices, <contact-type> 'service' or 'presentity', these devices can be controlled by people in multiple different spheres" Change to "Tuples representing multiple physical devices, i.e. <contact-type> with value 'service' or 'presentity', can be controlled by people in multiple different spheres"

- Add an example of token list of spheres.

- troup -> troop

Section 5.1
-----------

- Why is there 5.1 when there is only 1 example? You can just add some text under 5. describing the example

- <ep:activity> is with no value

- Remove <nn:blah>blah</nn:blah>. It makes the validation fail.

Section 6
---------

Schema line are too long and exceed the allowed limit of 72 characters

Regards,
Hisham

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple