All,
One bigger issue came to mind when reading common-policy. Currently,
common-policy defines a MIME type of application/auth-policy+xml, and
each using protocol that extends common policy, uses that same MIME type.
Would a better model be one where common-policy is an abstract class,
and each using protocol is a non-abstract subclass that extends the
common-policy abstract class?
This would mean, that there is no defined MIME type for common-policy
itself, but each using protocol definition creates one, e.g.,
application/presence-auth-policy+xml and so on.
Since common-policy defines no actions/transformations, and as such
application/auth-policy+xml alone is of no use, I think common-policy is
really an abstract class, and following that model would be a better option.
THoughts?
Cheers,
Aki
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
Received on Mon, 13 Feb 2006 11:29:18 +0200
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Feb 13 2006 - 04:36:31 EST