Re: [XCON] Conference Policy Control -comments on draft-koskelainen-xcon-xcap-cpcp-usage-00
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [XCON] Conference Policy Control -comments on draft-koskelainen-xcon-xcap-cpcp-usage-00
Hi Petri, and Hisham
I went over XCAP and the related documents and admit that it gives simple and light method to manipulate conference policy. :-)
I also have looked over your document and the defined XML schema, and found a lot of syntax errors and several schema validation errors.
I tried to correct them, and attach the schema file, which I get the successful validation message by running it into the XMLSPY.
Currently, I changed or added some of definition to get a valid schema.
I tried to read your intention as possible as I can, but please let me know if the corrections doesn't carry well on your intention.
-----------------
The brief note of the errors is as following:
1. Namespace should be defined for 'conference-policy' in order to reuse types and elements defined in the document.
[[Syntax errors]]
2. Comment type should be <!-- --> instead <! >
3. There are many cases where definitions are unappropriately ended. I cannot list all of them here; give an example:
<xsd:simpleType name="Visibility-type"/> <!-- '/' not necessary -->
<xsd:restriction base="xsd:string">
<xsd:enumeration value="visible"/>
<xsd:enumeration value="invisible"/>
</xsd:restriction>
</xsd:simpleType>
4.And, there are some mismatched or missed or redundant end tags.
ex) <xsd:element name="Host-info"> <!-- in "Conference-time" element -->
<xsd:complexType>
<xsd:sequence>
<xsd:element name="SIP-URI" type="xsd:anyURI" use="required"/>
.......... (some elements)
<xsd:sequence> <!-- you need to close the "sequence" with </xsd:sequence> -->
<xsd:sequence> <!-- and, you don't need one of the two "xsd:sequence" -->
<xsd:complexType>
</xsd:element>
[[Unvalid Schema Definition Errors]]
5. You use [use="required"] severral times in definition of elements, which is not appropriate. minOccurs="1" can be used, instead.
6. in your definition) <xsd:element name="Security-mechanism">
<xsd:complexType>
<xsd:attribute value="TLS" type="xsd:boolean" default="false"/>
<xsd:attribute value="S-MIME" type="xsd:boolean" default="false"/>
</xsd:complexType>
</xsd:element>
I got an error indicating unappropriate use of "value" in attribute;
I got the validation error in the following definition. I defined the type of Security-mechanism, and reuse it for the definition.
Please let me know if it is different from your intention. Then, I'll correct it as your intention.
7. <xsd:element name="Authorization-mechanism">
<xsd:complexType>
<xsd:restriction base="xsd:string">
<xsd:enumeration value="Digest"/>
<xsd:enumeration value="None"/>
</xsd:restriction>
<xsd:attribute name="Password" type="xsd:string"/>
</xsd:complexType>
I got an error indicating wrong use of "restrction" based enumeration value in a complexType.
I tried to define the type of Authorixation-type for the enumeration values.
8. <xsd:element name="ACL">
<xsd:complexType>
<xsd:sequence>
<xsd:element name="ACL-target-URI" type="xsd:anyURI" use="required" minOccurs="1"
MaxOccurs="unbounded"/>
<xsd:complexType>
<xsd:attribute name="Access-type" type="Access-mode"/>
</xsd:complexType>
</xsd:sequence>
</xsd:complexType>
</xsd:element>
Over the definition, the closed tag of "ACL-target-URI" element followed by MaxOccurs="unbounded" is not correct here, right?
I guess you'd like to make ACL-target-URI have an attribute, am I correct?
Anyway, I got an error indicating unappropriate use of attribute here, so I changed "ACL" element to the form of "PCL" and "DL" in this moment, but it is not your intention, please let me know.
------------------
I hope this will be helpful.
Sincerely,
Eunah
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: petri.koskelainen at nokia.com
> To: eunah at pec.etri.re.kr ; hisham.khartabil at nokia.com
> Cc: xiaotaow at cs.columbia.edu ; Markus.Isomaki at nokia.com ; jhyiee at etri.re.kr
> Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 10:51 PM
> Subject: RE: [XCON] Conference Policy Control
>
>
> Hi Eunah,
>
> Thanks for the input. CPCP is very different from floor control so we don't need to have same protocol
> for these (besides, XCAP is already used for presence-list manipulation which is similar to conf policy manipulation etc).
>
> If you can provide input to CPCP (e.g. what parameters should be included in the policy, or finding errors in XML Schema)
> that would be highly appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Petri
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: ext Eunsook Kim [mailto:eunah at pec.etri.re.kr]
>>Sent: 27 June, 2003 16:44
>>To: Khartabil Hisham (NMP/Helsinki); Koskelainen Petri (NRC/Tampere)
>>Cc: xiaotaow at cs.columbia.edu; Isomaki Markus (NRC/Helsinki); JongHwa
>>Subject: Re: [XCON] Conference Policy Control
>>
>>
>>Hisham,
>>
>>Thanks a lot for your response.
>>
>>I've chosen SOAP for acessing server elements of conference policy control, because it is a well-known standardized protocol.
>>Besides, I believe there is a close relationship between conference policy and floor controls, and I think that it would be good for the two >>mechanisms to use the same protocol.
>>As you know, Xioatao and Petri have already proposed a floor control draft using SOAP,
>>so, I've prototyped a few basic functions of policy control using SOAP, and wrote my draft.
>>However, SOAP is just one of the methods to allow client to access policy server information, and
>>I'm willing to do it by using XCAP, too
>>
>>I think, the main focus of this work is not if it should be SOAP or XCAP.
>>In my opinion, it is more important to design well-formed schema for policy control operations which can be standardized, and I think the >>conference design team has been doing very good job in this point of view. And, as the one who is very interested in and working on this area, >>I'm very happy to hear the XCON bof announcement, and I'll be very happy if I can help or contribute some parts on the works of design team.
>>
>>I'll go over all the XCON drafts again, and I would like to discuss on this topic with you more in the mailing list, if you'd like to.
>>
>>I appreciate your response again.
>>
>>Yours faithfully, Eunah
>>
>>
>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: hisham.khartabil at nokia.com
>>>To: eunah at pec.etri.re.kr ; petri.koskelainen at nokia.com
>>>Cc: xiaotaow at cs.columbia.edu ; Markus.Isomaki at nokia.com
>>>Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 3:24 PM
>>>Subject: RE: [XCON] Conference Policy Control
>>>
>>>
>>>Eunah,
>>>
>>>We appreciate your enthusiasm about the conferencing work.
>>>
>>>Your proposal so makes use of SOAP as a solution. To be honest, our interest in SOAP as a solution for conference policy protocol is very >>>minimal. That's why we chose XCAP, its simple and much lighter to implement than SOAP.
>>>
>>>If you feel that your proposal is the superior one, please feel free to involve yourself in the soon newly formed IETF working group, named >>>XCON, specifically designed to produce such conferencing protocols. The conferencing work so far has been done in a closed design team >>>where the XCAP has so far been well accepted as the conference policy solution.
>>>
>>>Much appreciated,
>>>Hisham
_______________________________________________
XCON mailing list
XCON at softarmor.com
http://www.softarmor.com/mailman/listinfo/xcon
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.
