[standards-jig] Re: JANA pt. 2

Robert Norris rob at cataclysm.cx
Mon Aug 5 23:28:42 UTC 2002


> Knowing that the protocol is entirely based on xml namespaces, does it mean
> that JANA will have to be consulted for every new namespace extension to be
> added in a JEP by the JSF ? If that is the case what would be the process ?
> Apart from namespaces, what kind of names would JANA handle ? Could we have
> a use case for each of them ?

I would suggest that people take a look at the relationship between the
IETF and IANA. As an example (because its the one I'm most familiar
with), take a look at Section 6 of RFC 2222. It describes a (at the
time) new function to be performed by IANA (that is, registering SASL
mechanism names), the role and responsibilities of the IANA for this
function, and the requirements for RFC authors that require a new name
registered.

As for actually registering names, this is sometimes done via a 'IANA
Considerations' (see RFC 2434) section in an RFC, or by simply making a
request of a nominated entity within the IANA. Again, this is defined by
the RFC that outlines the role of IANA for the particular namespace.

So, I would suggest something similar. Authors submitting JEPs that will
require names to be registered (eg JEP-0030), should consult with the
JANA committee as to the best use of JANA for that JEP. Once that has
been determined, the JEP will outline the procedure for registering new
names with the JANA (within that namespace). The JEP would also
reference an appropriate webpage that has information about the assigned
names for that application.

I hope I've made sense - I may have rambled a bit ;)

Rob.

-- 
Robert Norris                                       GPG: 1024D/FC18E6C2
Email+Jabber: rob at cataclysm.cx                Web: http://cataclysm.cx/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20020806/a7981042/attachment.sig>


More information about the Standards mailing list