Re: [apps-discuss] Review of draft-ietf-appsawg-file-scheme

Sean Leonard <dev+ietf@seantek.com> Sun, 15 May 2016 10:07 UTC

Return-Path: <dev+ietf@seantek.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5509C12D153; Sun, 15 May 2016 03:07:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dMaVTyn2KFWD; Sun, 15 May 2016 03:07:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE60912D152; Sun, 15 May 2016 03:07:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.123.7] (unknown [75.83.2.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 20781509B5; Sun, 15 May 2016 06:07:24 -0400 (EDT)
To: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>
References: <570D4C99.1030405@dcrocker.net> <CACweHND-OX+5okkJ+oE=6UN84x+CFtPBpMnU8HqaPbgQgJ_oWA@mail.gmail.com> <570E2510.4040408@ninebynine.org> <CACweHNCLS+QU2QveqYjkuPnDybbm-dtX9qQPsO4tTkgUoc5QYg@mail.gmail.com> <5710953E.5040505@gmx.de> <CACweHNDuDnP4P-4suUaFpS0OX-CbAYxn39jsZ3O_s-KYn=qbKw@mail.gmail.com> <a16b7cf5-3635-a3cb-b743-850f4047f862@gmx.de> <B3F27B33707E397A452D158D@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <6f2915b6-d36b-fbf6-f8a5-e35cf646faeb@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <88F1BC9BE8337F5D3B95E1BA@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <01Q01K03ULG000005M@mauve.mrochek.com> <CACweHNATdZxvjjbPswiZUCghjFUEMV-7sYyG+J7c096BZd2uLA@mail.gmail.com> <CACweHNDZTCOpDFJaPDBL6o-FxxNR7QqXpzoZGXUFpAvYxerKEA@mail.gmail.com> <5735D10C.4010305@dcrocker.net> <CACweHNAfQbn=8ozAky7XTSCiBrTARXpndJmatq29QsMEVGYW3A@mail.gmail.com> <f4ebfccc-070a-fc8d-1693-5289f712d43f@seantek.com> <CACweHNBoqKbm83wZYVVUt5mGt5wS6u87T8V8QoiZn9QtCUu5Yg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Sean Leonard <dev+ietf@seantek.com>
Message-ID: <4f60c0af-843f-a806-7ed9-e3a597b09774@seantek.com>
Date: Sun, 15 May 2016 03:06:31 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CACweHNBoqKbm83wZYVVUt5mGt5wS6u87T8V8QoiZn9QtCUu5Yg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------BF30DA3424362B4F386A04AF"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/FjQSAFd_dJ5ZMcu3lJ-GqmdWZV4>
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, IETF Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>, Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>, draft-ietf-appsawg-file-scheme@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Review of draft-ietf-appsawg-file-scheme
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/apps-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 May 2016 10:07:28 -0000

On 5/15/2016 2:53 AM, Matthew Kerwin wrote:
>
>
> On 15 May 2016 at 19:38, Sean Leonard <dev+ietf@seantek.com 
> <mailto:dev+ietf@seantek.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 5/14/2016 10:26 PM, Matthew Kerwin wrote:
>>
>>
>>     On 13 May 2016 at 23:05, Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com
>>     <mailto:dcrocker@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         On 5/13/2016 12:05 AM, Matthew Kerwin wrote:
>>
>>             4. Encoding
>>
>>             File systems use various encoding schemes to store file
>>             and directory
>>             names.
>>
>>
>>
>>         Just to be particularly picky, since the text is about name
>>         encoding and not, for example, content encoding, I suggest
>>         the title be
>>
>>            4. File Name Encoding
>>
>>         d/
>>
>>
>>     ​Fair enough. I've published this version, with the cut down text
>>     and the new section name, as -09 so people can view it in the
>>     whole or using the diff tools.
>
>     In the picky vein, Section 4 should be called
>     4. Path Encoding
>
>     Since we are talking about the whole path (including the host),
>     not just file names; "path" is a well-defined computing term and
>     the draft itself uses it. (But not really the fragment, which is
>     not part of the path.) The text of Section 4 does not need to be
>     changed.
>
>
> ​Actually, the host isn't part of the path, and this doesn't cover 
> the host anyway (that's handled by the term "fully qualified domain 
> name" and the ABNF for `host`.) The text actually talks about the file 
> system encoding (i.e. file path/name) rather than URI encoding. I was 
> wondering about "File Path Encoding" as a title, but I stuck with the 
> suggested "File Name Encoding" because I think people get it (it's 
> only a title, after all, not an interop-dependent normative 
> requirement), and we've previously stated that directories can be 
> treated as files, so dirname encoding should also be covered by 
> filename encoding.​
>

Compromise: how about "File Path Encoding"? ;-) Since "file name" 
implies file name (as distinct from directory name). Otherwise, we can 
go back to "Encoding"...

Sean