Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-op3ft-leaptofrogans-uri-scheme-03

Erik, thanks for your review. I entered a DISCUSS position to ask an IPR question and pointed to your review.

Alissa

> On Nov 13, 2018, at 11:53 PM, Erik Kline <ek@loon.co> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 20:23, Dale R. Worley <worley@ariadne.com <mailto:worley@ariadne.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Erik Kline <ek=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org> writes:
>>> Nits/editorial comments: I can't help but wonder if an example or two wouldn't
>>> round out the document.  But maybe leaptofrogans: URIs/IRIs aren't amenable to
>>> constructing an example?
>> 
>> I agree in principle with this.  Looking at reference [IFAP], here are
>> two examples:
>> 
>>    leaptofrogans:mynetwork*mysite
>>    leaptofrogans:my-network*MySite
>> 
>> The syntax of frogan addresses is very carefully specified, but most of
>> the work seems to revolve around using Unicode well:  Frogans are fully
>> internationalized, so there's a lot of work in [IFAP] specifying how to
>> use Unicode so that an address aligns with the intuitive sense of "a
>> text string".
>> 
>> But beyond the fact that a frogan address is split into two parts by a
>> "*" character, there isn't much syntax that's easily displayed by a
>> series of ASCII examples.
> 
> I understand about the limitations of the current RFC format w.r.t.
> non-ASCII characters (but I suspect you wouldn't want to wait for the
> new format to be readily available :-).
> 
> FWIW I think those two examples would be perfectly fine.  They may not
> seem overly expressive or especially illustrative, but including them
> might scratch an itch for some readers.
> 
> But it's certainly not anything worth holding up publication for, IMHO.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org <mailto:Gen-art@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>