Re: [auth48] [AD] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9554 <draft-ietf-calext-vcard-jscontact-extensions-10> for your review

[Karen Moore <[e-mail]>]

Hi Robert,

We have two additional questions.

1) Is the semicolon after “param-value” needed, or can it be deleted?

Original:
      created-param = "CREATED" "=" param-value ;
                   ; a valid TIMESTAMP of Section 4.3.5 of [RFC6350]

Perhaps:
      created-param = "CREATED" "=" param-value 
                   ; a valid TIMESTAMP of Section 4.3.5 of RFC 6350

2) Is  "This property is defined by the following notation:" needed? There are 15 format definitions, but this phrase only appears in 5  instances. Should all instances be removed for consistency, or do you prefer to keep it as is?

Original:
   Format definition:  This property is defined by the following 
        notation:

        pronouns       = "PRONOUNS" pronouns-param ":" text

Perhaps:
   Format definition: 

       pronouns       = "PRONOUNS" pronouns-param ":” text
  

Best regards,
RFC Editor/kc

> On Apr 3, 2024, at 5:28 PM, Karen Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Murray (AD) and *Robert,
> 
> We have noted your approval for the changes between versions 15 and 17 - thank you.
> 
> Additionally, please review the updates in Sections 3.2 and 3.4 and let us know if you approve. The changes can be viewed here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9554-auth48diff.html.
> 
> *Robert, thank you for the updated (corrected) XML file.  Our files now reflect these changes. We have an additional question.
> 
> 1) We updated this sentence for clarity; please let us know if it is agreeable or if you prefer otherwise.
> 
> Original: 
>   Implementations MUST take care to quote the name part, 
>   if otherwise the part would not be a valid param-value
>   (see Section 3.3 of [RFC6350]).
> 
> Current:
>   Implementations MUST take care to quote the name part;
>   if otherwise, the part will not be a valid "param-value" 
>   (see Section 3.3 of [RFC6350]).
> 
> FILES
> The updated XML file is here:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9554.xml
> 
> The updated output files are here:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9554.txt
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9554.pdf
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9554.html
> 
> This diff file shows all changes made during AUTH48:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9554-auth48diff.html
> 
> This diff file shows all changes made to date:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9554-diff.html
> 
> Note that it may be necessary for you to refresh your browser to view the most recent version. Please review the document carefully to ensure satisfaction as we do not make changes once it has been published as an RFC.
> 
> Please contact us with any further updates or with your approval of the document in its current form.  We will await approvals from each author prior to moving forward in the publication process.
> 
> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9554
> 
> Thank you,
> RFC Editor/kc
> 
> 
>> On Apr 2, 2024, at 9:00 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 2:47 PM <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> Authors and AD*,
>> 
>> While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as necessary) the following questions, which are also in the XML file.
>> 
>> 1) <!--[rfced] *AD, changes were submitted twice after the document was
>> initially approved. Please review the updates from version 15 to
>> version 17 and let us know if you approve. The updates can be
>> viewed in this diff file:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9554-ad-diff.html
>> -->                     
>> 
>> Those changes are approved.
>> 
>> -MSK, ART AD
> 
> 
>> On Apr 2, 2024, at 8:51 AM, Robert Stepanek <rsto=[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I am very sorry but we only come to realize there's a wrong example in the RFC after we sent you the updated document. The correct RFC draft now is attached.
>> 
>> Sorry for the mess,
>> Robert
>> 
>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2024, at 2:56 PM, Robert Stepanek wrote:
>>> Dear Editors,
>>> 
>>> thanks for your review. We now updated the document (attached) accordingly.
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> Robert
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Mar 15, 2024, at 10:42 PM, [e-mail] wrote:
>>>> *****IMPORTANT*****
>>>> 
>>>> Updated 2024/03/15
>>>> 
>>>> RFC Author(s):
>>>> --------------
>>>> 
>>>> Instructions for Completing AUTH48
>>>> 
>>>> Your document has now entered AUTH48.  Once it has been reviewed and 
>>>> approved by you and all coauthors, it will be published as an RFC.  
>>>> If an author is no longer available, there are several remedies 
>>>> available as listed in the FAQ (https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/).
>>>> 
>>>> You and you coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties 
>>>> (e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before providing 
>>>> your approval.
>>>> 
>>>> Planning your review 
>>>> ---------------------
>>>> 
>>>> Please review the following aspects of your document:
>>>> 
>>>> *  RFC Editor questions
>>>> 
>>>>   Please review and resolve any questions raised by the RFC Editor 
>>>>   that have been included in the XML file as comments marked as 
>>>>   follows:
>>>> 
>>>>   <!-- [rfced] ... -->
>>>> 
>>>>   These questions will also be sent in a subsequent email.
>>>> 
>>>> *  Changes submitted by coauthors 
>>>> 
>>>>   Please ensure that you review any changes submitted by your 
>>>>   coauthors.  We assume that if you do not speak up that you 
>>>>   agree to changes submitted by your coauthors.
>>>> 
>>>> *  Content 
>>>> 
>>>>   Please review the full content of the document, as this cannot 
>>>>   change once the RFC is published.  Please pay particular attention to:
>>>>   - IANA considerations updates (if applicable)
>>>>   - contact information
>>>>   - references
>>>> 
>>>> *  Copyright notices and legends
>>>> 
>>>>   Please review the copyright notice and legends as defined in
>>>>   RFC 5378 and the Trust Legal Provisions 
>>>>   (TLP – https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info/).
>>>> 
>>>> *  Semantic markup
>>>> 
>>>>   Please review the markup in the XML file to ensure that elements of  
>>>>   content are correctly tagged.  For example, ensure that <sourcecode> 
>>>>   and <artwork> are set correctly.  See details at 
>>>>   <https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary>.
>>>> 
>>>> *  Formatted output
>>>> 
>>>>   Please review the PDF, HTML, and TXT files to ensure that the 
>>>>   formatted output, as generated from the markup in the XML file, is 
>>>>   reasonable.  Please note that the TXT will have formatting 
>>>>   limitations compared to the PDF and HTML.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Submitting changes
>>>> ------------------
>>>> 
>>>> To submit changes, please reply to this email using ‘REPLY ALL’ as all 
>>>> the parties CCed on this message need to see your changes. The parties 
>>>> include:
>>>> 
>>>>   *  your coauthors
>>>> 
>>>>   *  [e-mail] (the RPC team)
>>>> 
>>>>   *  other document participants, depending on the stream (e.g., 
>>>>      IETF Stream participants are your working group chairs, the 
>>>>      responsible ADs, and the document shepherd).
>>>> 
>>>>   *  [e-mail], which is a new archival mailing list 
>>>>      to preserve AUTH48 conversations; it is not an active discussion 
>>>>      list:
>>>> 
>>>>     *  More info:
>>>>        https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc
>>>> 
>>>>     *  The archive itself:
>>>>        https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/
>>>> 
>>>>     *  Note: If only absolutely necessary, you may temporarily opt out 
>>>>        of the archiving of messages (e.g., to discuss a sensitive matter).
>>>>        If needed, please add a note at the top of the message that you 
>>>>        have dropped the address. When the discussion is concluded, 
>>>>        [e-mail] will be re-added to the CC list and 
>>>>        its addition will be noted at the top of the message. 
>>>> 
>>>> You may submit your changes in one of two ways:
>>>> 
>>>> An update to the provided XML file
>>>> — OR —
>>>> An explicit list of changes in this format
>>>> 
>>>> Section # (or indicate Global)
>>>> 
>>>> OLD:
>>>> old text
>>>> 
>>>> NEW:
>>>> new text
>>>> 
>>>> You do not need to reply with both an updated XML file and an explicit 
>>>> list of changes, as either form is sufficient.
>>>> 
>>>> We will ask a stream manager to review and approve any changes that seem
>>>> beyond editorial in nature, e.g., addition of new text, deletion of text, 
>>>> and technical changes.  Information about stream managers can be found in 
>>>> the FAQ.  Editorial changes do not require approval from a stream manager.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Approving for publication
>>>> --------------------------
>>>> 
>>>> To approve your RFC for publication, please reply to this email stating
>>>> that you approve this RFC for publication.  Please use ‘REPLY ALL’,
>>>> as all the parties CCed on this message need to see your approval.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Files 
>>>> -----
>>>> 
>>>> The files are available here:
>>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9554.xml
>>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9554.html
>>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9554.pdf
>>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9554.txt
>>>> 
>>>> Diff file of the text:
>>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9554-diff.html
>>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9554-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
>>>> 
>>>> Diff of the XML: 
>>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9554-xmldiff1.html
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Tracking progress
>>>> -----------------
>>>> 
>>>> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here:
>>>>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9554
>>>> 
>>>> Please let us know if you have any questions.  
>>>> 
>>>> Thank you for your cooperation,
>>>> 
>>>> RFC Editor
>>>> 
>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>> RFC9554 (draft-ietf-calext-vcard-jscontact-extensions-10)
>>>> 
>>>> Title            : vCard Format Extension for JSContact
>>>> Author(s)        : R. Stepanek, M. Loffredo
>>>> WG Chair(s)      : Bron Gondwana, Daniel Migault
>>>> Area Director(s) : Murray Kucherawy, Francesca Palombini
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Attachments:
>>> 	• rfc9554.xml
>> 
>> <rfc9554.xml>
>