If I recall, we already brought this issue up a few years ago. Which is why I converted the profile drafts to use relax NG. --- On Tue, 3/24/09, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: Design meeting for draft-ietf-sipping-config-framework > To: "Dale Worley" <dworley@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: "Gonzalo Camarillo" <Gonzalo.Camarillo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Mary Barnes" <mary.barnes@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Martin Dolly" <mdolly@xxxxxxx>, "Sumanth Channabasappa" <sumanth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Sam Ganesan" <sam.ganesan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Volker Hilt" <volkerh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Daniel Petrie" <dan.ietf@xxxxxxxxx>, "Jonathan Rosenberg (jdrosen)" <jdrosen@xxxxxxxxx>, "John-Luc Bakker" <jlbakker.ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Andrew Hutton" <andrew.hutton@xxxxxxxxxxx>, peter_blatherwick@xxxxxxxxx, alvin@xxxxxxxxxx, "Francois Audet" <audet@xxxxxxxxxx>, ekr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, roni.even@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, jason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Josh Littlefield (joshl)" <joshl@xxxxxxxxx>, "SIP Forum UA-Configuration Group" <ua-config@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "SIPPING" <sipping@xxxxxxxx> > Date: Tuesday, March 24, 2009, 4:56 PM > > On Mar 24, 2009, at 11:29 , Dale Worley wrote: > > > --- Schema language to specify data ranges, i.e., XML > Schema Language > > vs. Relax NG. But note that Relax NG seems to > delegate atomic types to > > XML Schema Language. > > Either can work here but what we choose here will more or > less set what we have to use for all the config data. It's > seem to me that most the XML experts that work with both > strongly prefer relax NG so I would go that way. > > Cullen <with my individual contributor hat on> > > _______________________________________________ Sipping mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use sip-implementors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for questions on current sip Use sip@xxxxxxxx for new developments of core SIP
