Re: [Ecrit] Editorial issues in similar-location-13

[Brian Rosen <[e-mail]>]

I thought I had addressed the “comma” problem in v13.  Turns out there is some kind of tooling problem: the xml2rfc on tools.ietf.org <http://tools.ietf.org/> is different from the one used in submission, and there is a bug, or at least some confusion, on the submission version.  I created a -14 that fixes it.

I did the other fixes also.

Brian


> On Nov 26, 2021, at 9:00 AM, Randall Gellens <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> (1) This wouldn't be worth a revision by itself, but I think we need a rev for item (2) so we may as well fix this also: In Section 3, the sixth paragraph starts "Since [RFC5222] currently does not have a way". The "currently" is awkward since an RFC is immutable. Consider rewording by either dropping the "currently" (making the text "Since [RFC5222] does not have a way") or changing "[RFC5222]" to "LoST" (making the text "Since LoST currently does not have a way").
> 
> (2) I think this should be fixed before we go to IETF Last Call: There are a few examples in Section 3 that were the focus of emails from several people requesting a comma before the city name. These examples have been changed to use a fictitious city but is still lack the comma. I think these should be fixed before IETF LC since this is a point of confusion. The text in question:
> 
>   Input address: 6000 15th Avenue Leets, WA US
> 
>   Complete Location: 6000 15th Avenue Northwest Leets, WA 98105 US
> 
> ...
> 
>   Input address: 6000 15th Avenue North Leets, WA US
> 
> ...
> 
>   Similar address #1: 6000 15th Avenue Northwest Leets, WA 98107 US
> 
>   Similar address #2: 6000 15th Avenue Northeast Leets, WA 98105 US
> 
> These should all have a comma inserted before "Leets".
> 
> 
> (3) Since I think we have to fix (2), we may as well fix this also: In the 7th line of the paragraph with first line:
> 
>   As another example of the use of <similarLocation>, consider the
> 
> There is a  missing space after a comma in the 13th paragraph of Section 3:
> 
>   have resulted in a uniquely identifiable location,the server can
> 
> (4) Same as item (1), the "[RFC5222] currently" wording appears in the 10th line of the paragraph starting:
> 
>   As another example of the use of <similarLocation>, consider the
> 
> (5) The 14th paragraph of Section 3 is:
> 
>   To show this, suppose that a slightly modified version of the above
>   address is sent within a Lost <findService request>:
> 
> Please move the close angle bracket to be after "findService" rather than "request".
> 
> 
> --Randall