Final minutes from the SCHEMA meeting

[Chris Weider <cweider@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

No corrections were received.
Chris

Draft SCHEMA minutes from Washington, D.C.

The agenda sent out was as follows:

1: Document Status
2: Discussion of draft-apple-schema-rqmts-list-03.txt
3: Discussion of draft-apple-schema-proc-list-00.txt
4: Discussion of draft-apple-schema-mime-metadata-00.txt
5: Disucssion of draft-apple-schema-file-list-01.txt
6: Discussion of operational structure
7: Any other business

One other item was added before the meeting:
8: A discussion of criteria for which schema should be developed in the IETF

Chris Apple presented a number of comments on the requirements and listing
procedures document:

*	Wording related to updating and deprecation
*	Don't use temporary names created by schema writer
*	Changes to repository access wording in requirements document
*	Confusion over names in the service: we are naming 3 things:
listings, requests, files
*	Typos in meta data examples
*	File name syntax spec: octal values <-> hex values
*	Change title of requirements doc to include word 'initial'
*	Typos...
*	File name syntax?
*	Why no meta schema listings?
*	Authorization contact -> MV (take to list?)
*	Conflict resolution for scheaTitle
*	Caveat words fixed / same for each listing

These will be addressed in the next versions of the document. The
authorization contact issue will be taken to the list. 

Next, Paul Hoffman presented a naming scheme for listed schema. There were
no comments as people hadn't read the document yet. Please read the document
and get comments to Paul and the list.

Discussion then started on what types of schema should be developed in the
IETF. Harald Alvestrand stated that in his opinion a schema should be
developed in the IETF only if it is required for the interoperation of a
protocol that the IETF is also working on. Other folks had other opinions,
and there was no consensus reached.