Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Clarify framer-specific message properties #972

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Mar 2, 2022
Merged

Conversation

tfpauly
Copy link
Contributor

@tfpauly tfpauly commented Dec 8, 2021

Closes #918

@tfpauly tfpauly self-assigned this Dec 8, 2021
@tfpauly
Copy link
Contributor Author

tfpauly commented Dec 8, 2021

The other option is to tell people to prepend the name of the framer to the property name.

Copy link
Contributor

@mwelzl mwelzl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I find this a little strange: given that we do have optional parameters, what's the benefit of first introducing the "add" and "get" calls as if the "framer" parameter didn't exist, and then later changing that? It would seem more consistent to me to introduce it where you had the scope parameter before, called "framer", and use a forward reference to say that framers will be explained later.

draft-ietf-taps-interface.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Philipp S. Tiesel <philipp@tiesel.net>
@tfpauly tfpauly merged commit 36df66f into master Mar 2, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

ART-ART: scope vs. framer
4 participants