[auth48] [AD] Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9555 <draft-ietf-calext-jscontact-vcard-13> for your review

[Karen Moore <[e-mail]>]

Hi Robert and *Orie (AD),

Apologies for the delayed reply.  We have been further discussing the use of  “text/plain” for partial vCard text - we will get back to you shortly on that, so we will hold off on updating the “type” for the sourcecode in this editing round.

In the meantime, we have removed 2 extraneous instances of “Section” under “Card /calendars” and “Card / directories" that were not needed in Table 8, and we updated the PROP-ID definition as follows.

Original:
  The PROP-ID parameter (Section 4.7 of [RFC9554]) converts to the Id-
  typed key of the JSContact object, to which the vCard property having
  this parameter converts.

Current:
  The PROP-ID parameter (Section 4.7 of [RFC9554]) converts to the 
  Id-typed key of the derived JSContact object.

*Orie, please review the following changes that were made by the authors during AUTH48 and let us know if you approve. Note that we double checked all of the section references that were added. The changes can be viewed here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9555-auth48diff.html. 

Abstract
Sections:
2.1.2
2.2.2
2.2.5
2.2.7
2.2.8
2.3.2
2.3.5
2.3.7
2.3.8
2.3.9
2.3.11
2.3.15
2.3.17
2.3.18
2.3.19
2.5.1
2.5.2
2.8.2
2.9.3
2.10.1
2.10.2
2.10.3
3.2.1
3.3.1
Appendix A (Table 8: organization —> organizationId)


— FILES (please refresh) —

The updated XML file is here:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9555.xml

The updated output files are here:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9555.txt
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9555.pdf
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9555.html

This diff file shows all changes made during AUTH48:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9555-auth48diff.html

These diff files show only the changes made during the last edit round:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9555-lastdiff.html
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9555-lastrfcdiff.html

This diff file shows all changes made to date:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9555-diff.html

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 and the AD prior to moving forward in the publication process.

For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9555

Best regards,
RFC Editor/kc

> On Apr 15, 2024, at 12:01 AM, Robert Stepanek <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Karen,
> 
> I'm not sure if you are waiting for our approval for RFC 9555? I am waiting for Editors to provide an updated document version for RFC 9555 with the changes I agreed to below, but maybe I have missed some email thread and you are waiting for some action on my behalf?
> 
> I can certainly apply the changes outlined below myself, should you prefer that.
> 
> Thanks,
> Robert
> 
> On Fri, Apr 5, 2024, at 11:10 AM, Robert Stepanek wrote:
>> Hi Karen, Orie,
>> 
>> On Thu, Apr 4, 2024, at 11:29 PM, Karen Moore wrote:
>>> > [OS] Thanks for making this change, in case "text/vcard" is rejected (for some tooling reason) "text/plain" would also work... in fact it may be more appropriate if the source code is not a fully valid vcard in text serialization... Is it valid?
>>> 
>>> Additionally, we updated Section 2.3.17 with Orie’s suggested text; however, if further changes are desired by the authors, we are happy to make the update.
>> 
>> The examples contain only partial vCard text, so strictly speaking "text/vcard" is not appropriate. If that is an issue, "text/plain" is equally fine.
>> 
>>> 
>>> > NEW:
>>> >    The PREF parameter (Section 5.3 of [RFC6350]) converts to the pref
>>> >    property of the derived JSContact object.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Please consider if any updates are needed to this similar sentence that follows in Section 2.3.18:
>>> 
>>>   The PROP-ID parameter (Section 4.7 of [RFC9554]) converts to the Id-
>>>    typed key of the JSContact object, to which the vCard property having
>>>    this parameter converts.
>> 
>> I think Orie's suggestion for the PREF parameter is great, and I kindly ask you to apply it also to the PROP-ID definition.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Robert