Next message: Geoffrey M. Clemm: "Re: Naive question"
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 12:37:48 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200009181637.MAA14339@tantalum.atria.com>
From: "Geoffrey M. Clemm" <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Subject: Re: XML attribute
The trouble with "optional" or "obligatory" (or "required") is that
the attribute doesn't indicate whether the element is optional or
required, but rather what the server should do if it doesn't understand
the element type (where the choices are "ignore" or "abort", or "ok"
or "error").
Cheers,
Geoff
From: Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 15:26:57 +0100
<ron>
Section 3.1: To me, "unknown" sounds more like one of the potential
values for this attribute. Maybe the name could be "if-unknown"
(which I don't really like either) or something that indicates that
the value is a choice to be taken conditionally.
</ron>
<geoff>
Anything that can be done to improve the name would be good.
Between "unknown" and "if-unknown", I probably prefer "unknown",
but I agree that "unknown" is not the optimal choice. Suggestions
welcomed!
</geoff>
How about 'optional' or 'obligatory' with a "T" or "F" value?
Tim