Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jscontact drafts
Joris Baum <joris@audriga.com> Thu, 08 December 2022 14:14 UTC
Return-Path: <joris@audriga.com>
X-Original-To: calsify@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: calsify@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0B9FC1526F6 for <calsify@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Dec 2022 06:14:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aKINzcQ9vBru for <calsify@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Dec 2022 06:14:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.audriga.com (mail.audriga.com [176.221.42.35]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45C74C1526F3 for <calsify@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Dec 2022 06:14:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.audriga.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7C25A0FF for <calsify@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Dec 2022 15:14:27 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.audriga.com
Received: from mail.audriga.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.audriga.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m86d_gCmvlu6 for <calsify@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Dec 2022 15:14:25 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [192.168.10.127] (ip-109-090-161-242.um36.pools.vodafone-ip.de [109.90.161.242]) (Authenticated sender: joris@audriga.com) by mail.audriga.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 33CA4A217 for <calsify@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Dec 2022 15:14:25 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------TShTG3sr3zZFFxRva6ns0gGN"
Message-ID: <23d97a2d-0927-a046-83cf-bf2a3f300d4a@audriga.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2022 15:14:24 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.5.1
Content-Language: en-US
To: calsify@ietf.org
References: <CADZyTkn_08H3zaG6PHwYOrN3sJZP_+_HUEF2ynWhsVBtg1bM4g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Joris Baum <joris@audriga.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADZyTkn_08H3zaG6PHwYOrN3sJZP_+_HUEF2ynWhsVBtg1bM4g@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/calsify/v3F7POOmcx08RNXk8Yy6GUNZekU>
Subject: Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jscontact drafts
X-BeenThere: calsify@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Calendaring and Scheduling Standards Simplification <calsify.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/calsify>, <mailto:calsify-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/calsify/>
List-Post: <mailto:calsify@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:calsify-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/calsify>, <mailto:calsify-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2022 14:14:35 -0000
I have looked at the three drafts and think they look good in general. Some comments and questions that came up during JSContact review: * You seem to have removed the CardGroup object in JSContact. The conversion spec still seems to mention it in Section 2.1.1 "Consequently, a vCard without UID property MAY does not convert to one exact instance of a JSContact card or card group". While I have no issue with it, I do not remember a discussion about this, nor do I find some mention in the IETF 115 minutes/slides or calext list. What is the reasoning behind this? * /Section 1.8:/ I assume vendors that would like to register their property with IANA are likely to jump on section 1.8 that describes vendor extensions and section 4 that describes IANA Considerations. I like that you renamed section 1.7.1 to "IANA-registered Properties" and are now explicit about naming conventions. Still, I think it would be good to reference 1.7.1 in sections 1.8 and section 4 somewhere. By referencing, it should be more obvious that "IANA-registered Properties" is not only relevant for developing validators, but also when creating new vendor extensions. I suggest something like "Properties registered at IANA must adhere to naming conventions defined in Section 1.7.1". * Section 2.2.4: Referring to my mail from 18th October, it is still not possible to model a contact with a department only. The Organization object cannot be created without a name. I still suggest making the name property optional (even though it can be an empty string. Maybe that would be the recommended route here?). Regards, Joris On 25.11.22 17:02, Daniel Migault wrote: > Hi everyone, > > As mentioned during the meeting we are starting a WGLC for the > following drafts. Please review by December 9 the documents and > provide your feedbacks to the list. Note this is important we got > some feedback. > > * https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-calext-jscontact/ > * https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-calext-jscontact-vcard/ > * https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-calext-vcard-jscontact-extensions/ > > > > Yours, > Bron and Daniel > > -- > Daniel Migault > Ericsson > > _______________________________________________ > calsify mailing list > calsify@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/calsify -- Joris Baum Tel: +49 721 170293 16 Fax: +49 721 170293 179 http://www.audriga.com |http://www.twitter.com/audriga -------------------------------------------------------------------------- audriga GmbH | Alter Schlachthof 57 | 76137 Karlsruhe Sitz der Gesellschaft: Karlsruhe - Amtsgericht Mannheim - HRB 713034 Geschäftsführer: Dr. Frank Dengler, Dr.-Ing. Hans-Jörg Happel --------------------------------------------------------------------------
- [calsify] Working Group Last call for jscontact d… Daniel Migault
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Robert Stepanek
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Ken Murchison
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Neil Jenkins
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Robert Stepanek
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Joris Baum
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Robert Stepanek
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Robert Stepanek
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Daniel Migault
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Robert Stepanek
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Daniel Migault
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Joris Baum
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Robert Stepanek
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Daniel Migault
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Daniel Migault
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Robert Stepanek
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Mario Loffredo
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Daniel Migault
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Robert Stepanek
- Re: [calsify] Working Group Last call for jsconta… Daniel Migault