Re: comments on draft-ietf-sming-reqs-03.txt

[Frank Strauss <strauss@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>]

Hi!

>> [Dave] Absolutely, simplifying the language is an important goal. Would not
>> enabling reuse and removing some of the weirdness and arcane rules of the
>> SMI help achieve this? 

Jon> Dave, I believe that could be done without creating an new syntax.

(I assume, when you talk about the syntax you mean some major
 characteristics of ASN.1, e.g. uppercase keywords and non-explicitly
 terminated macros. Formally, we'll need a new syntax (grammar) anyway.)

Reuse is just one aspect. There are other aspects of simplification
(e.g. 4.1.38 and 4.1.42) and completely different requirements that
all list a motivation section, which we should discuss if you don't
agree. This does belong to the requirements discussion and should
happen now.

There is no requirement that demands for a new syntax.  I admit that
I'm in favor of a new syntax to address some of the requirements of
the current requirements draft. But the discussion how to achieve the
requirements does not belong to the pressing requirements discussion.

 -frank