Re: Gen-ART LC Review of draft-freed-sieve-date-index-11

Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com> Sun, 25 May 2008 00:38 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64BC33A6958; Sat, 24 May 2008 17:38:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A32E3A68EC; Sat, 24 May 2008 17:38:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.961, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, HOST_EQ_STATIC=1.172]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1z2I5hZQzatj; Sat, 24 May 2008 17:38:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com (dsl-66-59-230-40.static.linkline.com [66.59.230.40]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2216D3A68CD; Sat, 24 May 2008 17:38:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MV6BC75AG0006VG0@mauve.mrochek.com>; Sat, 24 May 2008 17:38:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MV5RT6D08G00007A@mauve.mrochek.com>; Sat, 24 May 2008 17:38:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nowsp; d=mrochek.com; s=mauve; t=1211675904; h=Date: From:Subject:MIME-version:Content-type; b=ykE00WpEph1vREew+ghlnjWgJ phRidKzIwmGUpAdK2q/ErYY8Kf/e4Qsq4N9/fbqs5jDgPK0391yTLosDpAv4A==
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 17:08:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
Subject: Re: Gen-ART LC Review of draft-freed-sieve-date-index-11
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Fri, 23 May 2008 13:47:42 -0500" <09AD9420-BE70-40DB-ADB9-74C7C79470A4@estacado.net>
To: Ben Campbell <ben@estacado.net>
Message-id: <01MV6BC5XFXK00007A@mauve.mrochek.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
References: <09AD9420-BE70-40DB-ADB9-74C7C79470A4@estacado.net>
Cc: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>, ned.freed@mrochek.com, ietf@ietf.org, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, cyrus@daboo.name, alexey.melnikov@isode.com
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

> I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
> reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
> http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).

> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
> you may receive.

> Document: draft-freed-sieve-date-index-11
> Reviewer: Ben Campbell
> Review Date:  2008-05-23
> IETF LC End Date: 2008-05-28
> IESG Telechat date: (if known)

> Summary:

> This document is basically ready for publication as a draft standard.
> I have a few minor comments which I consider optional to address.

> Comments:

> Section 4:

> Does it make sense to add a reference for ":is" and "i;ascii-casemap"?

No. These are both core Sieve items defined in the Sieve base specification.
Anyone with enough familiarity with Sieve to actually make use of this
specification either as an implementor or user will necessarily know what these
are.

> Can you mention the reason that the date test can only apply to one
> header field at a time?

Date-time values specify a point in time. When you test one you're looking to
see if it meets certain criteria: Before a given time, after a given time, or
within some interval. The results become ambiguous the minute you allow the
test to consider multiple dates - someimtes you'd want it to succeed only if
all the dates passed the test, other times if any passed - so the test is
constructed so only a single date is selected.

I'm a long way from convinced such a longwinded explanation is worth adding,
however. Instead I'll just put in a point about this limit keeping the meaning
of the test simple and obvious.

> Last paragraph, last sentence: "... the last one that appears should
> be used."

> Is that a normative SHOULD?

Sure, why not?

> Section 4.1, time-zone syntax:

> I assume the 4 digits are hhmm, as mentioned later in the discussion
> of default time zone. It might help to explicitly state that in this
> section.

AFAIK there is no zone offset defined anywhere in email that works any other
way, but adding an explanation of it can't hurt.

> Section 6.1, section title:

> Section title is "Examples", but I only see one example :-)

Fixed.

				Ned
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf