[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: making a display hint RECOMMENDED in non-enum TCs
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 12:07:08AM -0700, C. M. Heard wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Jul 2003, C. M. Heard wrote:
> CMH> On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> ...
> CMH> JS> e) I recently came around the question whether numbered
> CMH> JS> objects which are not enumerations should always have
> CMH> JS> a display hint. So far, I always assumed that
> CMH> JS> implementations would use "d" as a default but that
> CMH> JS> is not required by the SMIv2. So by putting in an
> CMH> JS> explicit display hint, MIB authors give a clearer hint.
> CMH>
> CMH> Do you want the to say that a DISPLAY-HINT clause is
> CMH> RECOMMENDED? I am neutral on this, and request further
> CMH> input from the other MIB doctors. I'm happy to document
> CMH> the consensus, I just want to hear what it is.
>
> On Mon, 7 Jul 2003, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) replied:
> BW> I am neutral on this. I prefer defaults to be spelled out (there
> BW> are so many defaults to remember in life), but would hate to see
> BW> another CLR.
>
> Unless there is strong support for putting this in (and a concrete
> suggestion both for the text and where to put it), I intend to leave
> this out. I think we have enough rules to enforce as it is.
In that case, we should probably say somewhere that the common
interpretation of an absent DISPLAY-HINT is "d" format.
/js
--
Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/> P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany