Re: [apps-discuss] [Uri-review] New version of tn3270 draft

[Mykyta Yevstifeyev <[e-mail]>]

Hello Julian,

Here are responses on your notes.

28.11.2010 12:30, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 28.11.2010 11:06, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> A new version of tn3270 draft (-05) is now available on
>> the I-D repository. It includes the following changes:
>>
>> -added the template for IANA to register the scheme as
>> *Provisional*;
>> -added more detailed description of TN3270 service
>> (with references to corresponding RFCs);
>> -added more references;
>> -added Acknowledgments section;
>> -another minor changes.
>>
>> I am sending this message to Applications Area ADs -
>> Alexey Melnikov and Peter Saint-Andre in order they
>> can review this document.
>>
>> Any suggestions for improvements are welcome.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Mykyta Yevstifeyev
>
> Sunday morning nitpicking:
>
> 1) It's really confusing when you submit 3 drafts on the same day, and 
> some of them only fix minor typos, or punctuation. That makes it hard 
> to find out what actually changed. Also, draft -04 seems to have the 
> wrong submission date.
Now we are speaking about -05 draft.
>
> 2) A URI scheme definition that cites RFC 3986 only for security 
> considerations makes me nervous. 
See section 1 - Introduction. There is not only one Sec. Cons. citing.
> For instance, it should be clear how the individual components would 
> be recognized by a generic URI parser. It appears that all you're 
> saying that the scheme-specific part maps to:
>
>   "//" authority
The scheme syntax is similar to 'telnet:'. The same recognition is intended.
>
> 3) ABNF comments
>
> 3a) What's the delimiter between password and host?
I have mentioned that it is ":".
>
> 3b) What's the [/] at the end for? Did you mean [ "/" ]?
Yes, I meant ["/"]. Would be corrected.
>
> 3c) Please avoid prose constructions; they are not sufficient to 
> actually parse the URI. So which characters are allowed in "user", 
> "password" and "host"?
There is such information is Encoding considerations template section.
>
> 4) You're not citing the URI scheme registration RFC (4395), nor have 
> the information requested in 
> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4395#section-5.4>.
Why not mentioned? See section 4 of the draft - IANA Cons. The full 
template is given.
>
> Best regards, Julian
>
All notes seem to conform -04 draft. Maybe you are looking at html 
version, which
is not formed yet. Look at plain text version.

All the best,
Mykyta Yevstifeyev