Changes made to version 0

Changes made to version 0.9 from the VOTE, etc.:

DRA comments:

2) (minor editorial) - In section 2.4 remove the reference to Drafts in the title - RFC's are not draft documents. Earlier versions probably had references to Internet Draft documents and there are non listed anymore. In general Internet Drafts should not be referenced because they are documents in flux and likely to be invalid within 6 months of issuance.

BAS: Revised

3) In section 6.5 there is a reference to the Guidelines for ILL Application Developers - it needs to be mentioned in the references section.

BAS: No change. The Guidelines are referenced in the Introduction

5) Section 6.11 is still a little confusing - I think the intent there is to say that something like composite data elements should only be truncated at element boundaries - people who have been involved in the IPIG understand the text as is but it may be a bit confusing to someone just picking up the document who has not been involved.

BAS: Revised. Please check new wording.

RESEARCH LIBRARIES GROUP (Linda Driver)
Corrections to the Profile:

1) Annex A, Section A.6.1, ILL-Request APDU, Ref.no.26: Prompt-1 extension is Optional. Also noted by RuthM, with additional change that the Prompt-1 Extension (1 2 840 10003 8 1) should be supported optionally in extension fields for Cancel and Expired APDUs.

BAS: Corrected

2) Annex A, Section A.6.19, Status-Or-Error-Report APDU, Ref.no.10: APDU-Delivery-Info is Mandatory.

BAS: Corrected

Editorial comments:

1) Section 6.2.1, 3rd line -- remove "service" after"store-and-forward"; the second occurrence of "service" is redundant.

BAS: Done

2) Section 6.2.2, 1st bullet -- change the hyphen between "type" and "maximum" to a period: ILL-Request.cost-info-type.maximum-cost

BAS: Done

3) Section 6.3, 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence should end with the word "history." The third sentence should be: "IPIG has chosen to interpret..."

BAS: Done

4) Section 6.8 should be incorporated into Section 6.9.1. Start 6.9.1 with the two sentences in 6.8, followed by the first 3 sentences in 6.9.1. Drop the fourth sentence--"The MIME type for each..."; this sentence is redundant. Then continue with "The RFC 822..."

BAS: I think I did this. Please check to see that it is as you suggested.

5) Section 6.10, Examples -- here is a UTF-8 example:

<esc> 2/5 2/15 4/9 (Note: implementation level 3, without standard return)

BAS: Done

8) Section 7.4 -- Remove "[MJ to Clarify Offline]" from heading.

BAS: Done

Mike Wheatley, MLW Ltd.:

Section 6.9 Use of Supporting Services: 2nd paragraph should read "...to the IPIG Profile are also able to employ..." rather than "...Profile also are able to emply..."

BAS: Strange. This was correct in my copy…

Section 6.9.2 Using Direct Transfer over TCP: To match the table in A.4.3 it may be helpful to add text to the final sentence saying "...and shall be able to connect to port 1611 and may also be able to connect to port 499."

BAS: Is this necessary? If so, please suggest rewording with shorter sentences. I found this added complexity to the sentence and did not make the change.

A.4.1 'Abstract Syntaxes': There is a problem with some of these as they are not referenced within the rest of the document. ie some are such as SICI so presumably there should be references in A.6 showing where they can be used. Those unreferenced are:

Ref.6 & 7 e-delivery-mode - should indicate their use in A.6.1 ILL-Request Ref.8.2.1.1

Ref.8 e-delivery-parameters - should indicate its use in A.6.1 ILL-Request Ref.8.2.1.2 and/or possibly in 7.6.

(incidentally A.6.1 Ref.8.2.1.2 incorrectly references 7.7. Praps should be 7.6?)

BAS: corrected

Ref.9 document-type-id - should indicate its use in A.6.1 ILL-Request Ref.8.2.2.1 & A.6.16 Ref.6.1

Ref.14 extension Suppliers-Reference - should indicate its use in relevant APDUs extensions (probably those sent by responder)

BAS: I think that Supplier-Reference needs discussion, so made no changes. Also mentioned by Kevin in BL vote. But I added all the rest…

A.5.1 'Support of Services': Ref.2 Requester-Impl column should contain "--" (hyphens) as it is Not applicable.

BAS: Done.

A.6.1 'ILL-Request APDU': Ref.8.2.1.1 to 8.2..2.1 see comments on A.4.1 above.

BAS: Done

Ref.26 IPIG & Impl column for Prompt1 should contain "O" and "[ ]" respectively.

BAS: Done.

A.6.16 'Damaged APDU': Ref.6.1 - see comments on A.4.1 Ref.9 above.

BAS: Done

A.6.19 'Status-or-Error-Report APDU': Ref.8.3.1 IPIG column should contain "X" not "O" and the end column "Forwarding service is out-of-scope for IPIG Profile."

BAS: Done

More from Kevin G., BL

In A.4.1 ref.14 the OID should be 1 0 10161 13 7.

BAS: Done

Change the example in 7.4 of the protocol to read:

US:CCG;BL:CFP

CFP is the abbreviation we are using for Copyright Fee Paid.

BAS: Done. Also added CFP to the list of abbreviations

Andrew Braid, BL (re: Guidelines for Copyright Compliance 6.1.2)

As to the Guidelines, the first part I have difficulty with is:

*if an indication of the specifics of copyright-compliance is legally required by the country to which the request is being sent (e.g., U.S.) or by the supplier (e.g., British Library).

The problem I have that it is not always a legal requirement for us. It can be voluntary on the part of the user. We do have examples of customers in the UK who use both out fee paid service and our fair dealing service for different reasons, not all of which are legal reasons. So I would suggest delete "legally"

BAS: Done

Add 6.2.1.2 Requests sent to the British Library

The British Library offers a Copyright Fee Paid service and a Library Privilege (equivalent to Fair Use) service for non-returnable items. These are signified as BL:CFP and BL:LP respectively.

There are complex rules about which users are able to use which service, for instance, the Library Privilege service is not available to any users in the USA. Requests which do not meet the correct criteria for the Library Privilege service and requests with a blank or non-BL conformant copyright-compliance value will either be forced into the Fee Paid service or rejected.

BAS: Done

Mary Jackson:

p. 2 Capitalize Technology in ISO/IEC 10646-1:1993.

BAS: Done

p. 3 check the titles of RFC 2046 and 2047 they are inconsistent, but it may be the way the title is listed.

BAS: Obviously the authors of the MIME RFCs are not librarians and didn't take care to construct their titles the same way for each part… I've taken the titles from the works and they do vary.

p. A1 third bullet at top of page.Inform the ILL ASMA of the URL for listing in the central registry.Lists. (adding a few "the" and make list plural.

BAS: Done

p. A2 a.1.5 third lineRequirements (plural not singular) and, on that page, is it possible to align the date of statement to parallel the A.2.2?

BAS: Done.

p. A3 a.3.4 Implementations conforming (plural), and again, align the table to parallel the others on that page.

BAS: Done

p. A5 a.4.3 delete the hyphen in 2.2 between connect and to; and change ref number for the last row to 2.4

BAS: Done

p. A6 ref for 15 delete the period after service in the last ref and add "also" after SHALL.RENEW service SHALL also.

BAS: Done

p. A8 ref text in 6 "as" is bold and should not be.

BAS: Not in my copy. No change

p. A12 shouldnt 21.7.3.1 and 21.7.3.2 have a reference for the details on formatting?

- delete the brackets in 23 and 24 (BAS: I think you meant 25)

- shouldnt 26.1 have a reference to see 6.1?

BAS: Done

p. A15 add period at end of second reference for 7.1.3.1.1.

BAS: Done

p. A16 align the external object references in 14 at top of page to parallel the references lower on the page.

BAS: Done

p. A17 A.6.8, ref 6 text6responder-id), - switch the parens and comma

BAS: Done

p. A22 ref 8 needs note on why this is conditional

BAS: Looked at the PICS standard and found that the condition referred to forwarding, so made it optional.