KMLM List
View email archives for the history of this mailing list.
|
|
|
|
ncipinfo - Re: [ncipinfo] NISO Document errata
|
Message Thread:
Previous |
Next
|
- To: "Gray, Robert" <Robert.Gray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Robert Walsh <rwalsh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:26:43 -0500
- Cc: "ncipinfo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <ncipinfo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Send Email to ncipinfo@list.niso.org:
- Send new message
- Reply to this message
|
Is the order of the elements significant in terms of "correctness"? I
understand the need for consistency, but is it "wrong" as currently implemented?
(I ask because I don't know, not because I have an opinion that I am trying to
express through a question.)
Rob Walsh
EnvisionWare, Inc.
NCIP Maintenance Agency
On Jan 27, 2010, at 12:36 PM, Gray, Robert wrote:
> The standard document has two problems that I can see. I’d like to have
> these items fixed for anyone implementing 2.0.
>
> · It declares the Authentication Prompt as:
> o Prompt Input and then
> o Prompt Output whereas the schema was written as: PromptOutput and then
> PromptInput.
> · It also declares Prompt Input as:
> o Authentication Data Format Type
> o Authentication Input Type
> o Sensitive Data Flag whereas the schema was written as:
> AuthenticationInputType, AuthenticationDataFormatType, SensitiveDataFlag, Ext.
>
> For Issue one, I would like to recommend that the document to switch the
> order of Prompt Output and Prompt Input to match the schema.
> For issue two, I would rather have the schema match the document as I think
> that the Authentication Data Format Type should be the first element in the
> sequence.
>
> Rob.
>
> <image001.png>
>
> http://www.niso.org/kst/reports/standards/kfile_download?id%3Austring%3Aiso-8859-1=z39-83-1-2008.pdf&pt=RkGKiXzW643YeUaYUqZ1BFwDhIG4-24RJbcZBWg8uE4vWdpZsJDs4RjLz0t90_d5_ymGsj_IKVa86hjP37r_hE99qsnqf854LYt9cr4o0Qyz_qXc74Efih6LWF9-Z2pBb4awYU78NkE%3D
> Screen clipping taken: 1/27/2010, 12:27 PM
>
>
>
>
|
|
