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

[Orie Steele <[e-mail]>]

Lets use text/plain for the examples that include parts of the vcard data
model.

I approve these changes.

Regards,

OS

On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 2:27 PM Karen Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:

> 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
>
>

-- 


ORIE STEELE
Chief Technology Officer
www.transmute.industries

<https://transmute.industries>