Document: Spec Requested by: Alejandro Abdelnur

Request: Change UserScope to an open ended set rather than requiring use of extensions

Reasoning: We would do not require vendors to use an extension field to indicate a custom userScope. It would be similar to the way we handle custom portlet modes and custom window states, where we do not require the use of an extension field.

Impacts various places:

Section: 7.1.1 Page/Line: 47-48 Old text: [insert] Proposed text: [O] string consumerUserScopes[] Description: consumerUserScopes: This field carries the values of custom UserScopes the Consumer is willing to process.

Section: 5.1.11 Page/Line: 19-20 Old text: [insert] Proposed text: [O] string customUserScopes[] Description: customUserScopes: This field carries the custom UserScopes this Portlet MAY assert in a CacheControl structure.

Section: 6.1.4 Page/Line: 27 Old text: [delete bullet] "other": The caching relative to users fits neither of the above descriptions. Proposed text: [insert] UserScope is an open set of values where the Producer SHOULD restrict the values supplied to those specified in this specification or custom values the Consumer has indicated it supports. If another value is specified and the Consumer does not understand it, the Consumer should ignore the cache control and treat the content as non-cacheable.

Section: 6.1.5 Page/Line: 27 Old text: If the userScope has a value of “other, the Consumer SHOULD look in the extensions field for additional information. If no user scope for caching the markup is established, the Consumer SHOULD NOT cache the markup. Proposed text: If the Consumer does not know how to process the specified user scope, it MUST NOT cache the markup.