Re: [calsify] Erik Kline's No Objection on draft-ietf-calext-jscalendar-30: (with COMMENT)

[Robert Stepanek <[e-mail]>]

Hi Erik,

many thanks for your review! I have updated the draft document. We will submit the new version when we gathered all feedback from IESG.

On Mon, Sep 21, 2020, at 2:40 AM, Erik Kline via Datatracker wrote:
> [[ questions ]]
> 
> [ section 1.4.5 ]
> 
> * Since non-zero fractional seconds is not the same as not having
>   any trailing zeros, should the "to ensure there is only a single
>   representation" guidance from UTCDateTime also apply here?
> 
>   In other words, is "PT1.300S" acceptable?

It is not. I have updated the description of the Duration type.

> [ section 1.4.7 ]
> * Should there be a reference to RFC 4122 here?
> 
> [ section 3(.0) ]
> * Should the I-JSON reference be 7493?
> 
> [ section 6.3 ]
> * Is this entries array really valid JSON?  I didn't think the map key
>   could appear in the array like this (vis. the jstask entry).
> 
> [ section 6.9 ]
> * Should the "excluded" value be true rather than "true"?
> 
> [[ nits ]]
> [ section 4.2.6 ]
> * It seems unlikely that a virtual event would have a "door access code".
>   Perhaps "conference access code" or "meeting access code" or something?

Thanks for spotting all of these! I have fixed the document accordingly.

Best regards,
Robert