Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-salgueiro-vcarddav-kind-device-06

[Joe Marcus Clarke <[e-mail]>]

On 11/30/12 11:27 AM, Gonzalo Salgueiro wrote:
> Vijay - 
> 
> Good to hear from you, my friend. Hope you are well.
> 
> Thanks for the detailed review. As for your two nits:
> 
> 1. I'm fine with the suggested edit and will update the next version (after IETF LC) with the suggested changes.

++

> 
> 2. FN is a well-known identification property for vCards and does expand to "Full Name". Even in RFC 6350 it doesn't appear to be expanded, so I'll likely continue that trend and simply add a reference section 6.2.1 of RFC 6350 after the usage of FN to help the uninitiated in vCards.  Is that OK with you?

FN is a property name, so I think we should leave it as-is.  Since we
already reference 6350, and we don't annotate each property, do we need
another ref?  I think those in the vCard domain will recognize FN.
Thoughts?

Joe

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Gonzalo
> 
> On Nov 30, 2012, at 9:50 AM, Vijay K. Gurbani wrote:
> 
>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
>> Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
>> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>>
>> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
>> you may receive.
>>
>> Document: draft-salgueiro-vcarddav-kind-device-06
>> Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani
>> Review Date: Nov-30-2012
>> IETF LC End Date: Dec-26-2012
>> IESG Telechat date: Unknown
>>
>> This document is ready as a Proposed Standard.
>>
>> Major: 0
>> Minor: 0
>> Nits: 2
>>
>> Nits:
>>
>> 1/ S1: The value "thing" sort of creeps up on you in the second
>> paragraph.  Upon further reading, it becomes more apparent that
>> during the WG discussions "thing" was a meta-value (or super-
>> class) and that "application" and "device" appear to be sub-
>> classes (or specific values) of "thing"s.
>>
>> Furthermore, rf6473 already defined "application" and that this
>> particular draft is now defining "device".
>>
>> To better impart this information, I would suggest the following
>> simple modification
>>
>> OLD:
>> ...Working Group defined values of "individual", "org", "group", and
>> "location" for the KIND property.  Additionally, [RFC6473] has
>> defined a value of "application" for the KIND property to represent
>> software applications.
>>
>> During working group discussion of the document that became
>> [RFC6473], consideration was given to defining a more general value
>> of "thing", but it was decided to split "thing" into software
>> applications and hardware devices and to define only the
>> "application" value at that time....
>>
>> NEW:
>> ...Working Group defined values of "individual", "org", "group", and
>> "location" for the KIND property.
>>
>> During working group discussion of the document that became
>> [RFC6473], consideration was given to defining a more general value
>> of "thing", but it was decided to split "thing" into software
>> applications and hardware devices and to define only the
>> "application" value at that time....
>>
>> 2/ S2, top of page 4: "FN" probably expands to "Full Name".  If it is
>> an accepted practice to use "FN" in your domain, then you can leave
>> it unexpanded.  If not, then an expansion may help the general reader
>> (like me) who may think what "FN" is.  (The rest of the properties
>> listed on page 4 and 5 appear to be self-explanatory).
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> - vijay
>> -- 
>> Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
>> 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
>> Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / [e-mail]
>> Web:   http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/
>>
> 
> 


-- 
Joe Marcus Clarke, CCIE #5384,         |          |
SCJP, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, VCP        |||||      |||||
Distinguished Services Engineer ..:|||||||||::|||||||||:..
Phone: [phone]         c i s c o  S y s t e m s
Email: [e-mail]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------