On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 03:00:31PM +0000, Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - 
FR/Paris-Saclay) wrote:
> Dear IESG reviewers, Jürgen, Brian, Barry, 
> 
> Thank you very much for your review and suggestions. Upon your feedback, we 
> have posted a new version 18, that hopefully addresses your comments. 
> Besides, some lower/upper case typo harmonization has been done on 
> expressions such as "Client", "Server", "cost type". 
> We look forward to having your feedback,
>

Thanks for the changes. All looks good but I am still struggling a bit
with the type change of the cost field. Revision -18 has this new
text:

   [...] Therefore the implementor of this extension MUST consider
   that a cost entry is an array of values.

I do not really understand what this MUST tries to achieve or what you
expect an implementer to do exactly.

RFC 7285 section 11.2.3.6 says:

   [...] An implementation of the protocol in this document
   SHOULD assume that the cost is a JSONNumber and fail to parse if it
   is not, unless the implementation is using an extension to this
   document that indicates when and how costs of other data types are
   signaled.

It may help to spell out 'when and how costs of other data types are
signaled' instead of writing "the implementor [...] MUST consider". If
the idea is that the usage of an array is signaled by the usage of an
array, then say so, if there is some other way to signal this before I
try to parse, then say so as well. We should not rely on implementers
to consider and find their own solutions.

/js

PS: I do not know much about ALTO but out of curiosity: has it been
    considered to allocate new "cost-mode" values "numerical*" and
    "ordinal*" that signal that the cost field is a vector of
    numerical/ordinal values and not just a scalar?

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>

_______________________________________________
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto

Reply via email to