Re: [calsify] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-calext-ical-relations-08

[Michael Douglass <[e-mail]>]

Thanks for this - see updates below

I've just submitted a version 09 of the draft.

On 10/31/21 08:07, Christer Holmberg via Datatracker wrote:
> Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
> Review result: Ready with Nits
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
> like any other last call comments.
>
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>
> Document: draft-ietf-calext-ical-relations-08
> Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
> Review Date: 2021-10-31
> IETF LC End Date: 2021-10-28
> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
>
> Summary: I have no technical issues with the draft, and the text is quite easy
> to understand also for someone not familiar with the topic. However, I do have
> some editorial comments (specific and general) that I would like the authors to
> address.
>
> Major issues: N/A
>
> Minor issues: N/A
>
> Nits/editorial comments:
>
> Q1:
>
> Please make sure that there are references on first occurrence.
>
> For example, the first sentence of Section 1:
>
> "iCalendar entities often..."
>
> ...should have a reference to RFC 5545.
>
> In addition, I don't think we use references in the Abstract
>
> ---
Done
>
> Q2:
>
> The Abstract says:
>
> "This specification updates RELATED-TO defined in..."
>
> I think it would be good to add a few words on HOW RELATED-TO is updated.
>
> Also, please say "RELATED-TO property".
>
> ---

---OLD---

This specification updates RELATED-TO defined in iCalendar (RFC5545)
and introduces new iCalendar properties LINK, CONCEPT and REFID to
allow better linking and grouping of iCalendar components and related
data.

---OLD---

---NEW---

    This specification updates the iCalendar RELATED-TO property by
    adding new relation types and introduces new iCalendar properties
    LINK, CONCEPT and REFID to allow better linking and grouping of
    iCalendar components and related data.

---NEW---


>
> Q3:
>
> Related to Q2, in Section 9 you say that you redefining RELATED-TO. I think
> redefine and update are two separate things, so please clarify.
Changed to update
>
> And, while Section 1.1 does explain how RELATED-TO is updated/redefined, it
> would probably be good to have some text in Section 9 too. For example, if I
> understand correctly you are updating Section 3.8.4.5. of RFC 5545. That should
> be mentioned.
>
> I would also consider changing the name of Section 9 to "Updates to RFC 5545",
> and then in the text describe what those updates are.

I've changed the name and added text

---OLD---

9.  Redefined RELATED-TO Property

9.1.  RELATED-TO

---OLD---

---NEW---

9.  Updates to RFC 5545

    This specification updates the RELATED-TO property defined in
    Section 3.8.4.5 of [RFC5545].

    The RELTYPE parameter is extended to take new values defining
    temporal relationships, a GAP parameter is defined to provide lead
    and lag values, and RELATED-TO is extended to allow URI values.
    These changes allow the RELATED-TO property to define a richer set of
    relationships useful for project management.

9.1.  RELATED-TO

---NEW---

:

>
> ---
>
> Q4:
>
> The text in Section 1.1 says:
>
> "The currently existing iCalendar [RFC5545] RELATED-TO property has no support
> for..."
>
> Please avoid "currently", because it will have a different meaning depending on
> when someone reads the spec.
>
> Instead, I suggest to simply say:
>
> "The iCalendar [RFC5545] RELATED-TO property has no support for..."

Done

>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> calsify mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/calsify