attachment

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7232.60"> <TITLE>CIM> CIM Core discussion about MappingString format</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY>  Went well.  Not perfectly, which is my fault but easily fixed.  Discussion points: - MIB.PWG okay.  - Hyphen instead of dot okay.  The only reasonable alternative is %2E or some such, which is much more hostile to humans.  - "Section 4" was questioned.  I, unfortunately, could not get the doc (PWG5101.1) open in time to look at the section, and I didn't remember it.  The group's statement was If there is a table or data structure containing a property, one should use pipe syntax, e.g.,     doc.authority | structurename | propertyname.  See examples in the new association CIM_SCSIInitiatorTargetLogicalUnitPath, which is, horrors, a three-way association, but includes several examples of this syntax, e.g.,     MP_API.SNIA|MP_PATH_LOGICAL_UNIT_PROPERTIES|deviceFileName HOWEVER, that doesn't apply to the PWG5101.1 "Section 4 Media Color Names" case, anyway.  As I read it, Section 4 is a textual convention, one of three in the doc, which might be specified as a syntactic restriction on any number of properties in other specifications.  There is no property name within a structure to be cited.  I assume that the same reasoning would apply to any other textual convention if there were no other formal syntax to apply.  The IANA textual conventions that we cite do have a reasonable structure because they are defined in MIBs, so that case is not comparable.  Conclusion: no problem.  I closed off the debate by saying that we would take a look at it and send a revised email with context so that they could understand the "Section 4" case, however we resolved it.  We should send a very simple revised message (again to wg-cimcore), with wording about textual conventions but not in formal MIB or other syntax, and maybe an extract of Section 4 from the document, declare victory, and move on.  Ira, can you make the slight additions? Also, a nit, I found a minor typo in PWG5101.1 when I was looking at our friend Section 4: the first para ends with "…as defined in Table ."  It should say "Table 1." Have a good weekend, all. rick ---------------------- Richard_Landau(at)dell(dot)com, Stds & System Mgt Arch, CTO Office +1-512-728-9023, One Dell Way, RR5-3 MS 8509, Round Rock, TX 78682 </BODY> </HTML>