On 04/24/14 01:38, Mark Wielaard wrote:
Hi Michael,
On Wed, 2014-04-23 at 06:54 -0700, Michael Eager wrote:
On 04/23/14 04:46, Mark Wielaard wrote:
An alternate might be to include a location list entry for the range
where the object is not available and have that contain a zero-length
location list. That would be non-standard, but I think that any
consumer would reasonable interpret this as location not available.
That could work. It just needs a bit more work on the producer side to
know whether using a default location entry plus filling in "the
gaps" (and start and end range) results in a smaller location list.
Could that be made into "standard behavior" and recommended as best
practice when using a default location entries?
The best practice is to use the default location list entry as it was
intended and as documented.
I don't think that is a very useful way to document the best practice.
If it was perfectly clear what the intention of the producer and
interpretation of the consumer was when using a default location list
entry then we wouldn't be having this conversation :)
We will review the entire document before we publish a public review draft.
We will keep your comments in mind when we look at this section.
--
Michael Eager ea...@eagercon.com
1960 Park Blvd., Palo Alto, CA 94306 650-325-8077
_______________________________________________
Dwarf-Discuss mailing list
Dwarf-Discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org
http://lists.dwarfstd.org/listinfo.cgi/dwarf-discuss-dwarfstd.org
