Re: [Jcardcal] [Gen-art] Genart LC review: draft-ietf-jcardcal-jcal-09

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Thu, 27 March 2014 17:40 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: jcardcal@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jcardcal@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD2881A06B8; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 10:40:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.912
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fkBXx0472uBl; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 10:40:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AD171A0182; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 10:40:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aither.local (unknown [24.8.129.242]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C84194010C; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 11:40:22 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <53346286.9050404@stpeter.im>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 11:40:22 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Philipp Kewisch <kewisch@gmail.com>
References: <531F5C0D.5040903@nostrum.com> <3FA85917-2D35-4A33-955E-AF4644202C94@piuha.net> <53329329.8040100@gmail.com> <5332BA94.8010907@gmail.com> <533458B1.5020603@stpeter.im> <295BA67B-DD6A-415A-B47D-65F88D6A857E@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <295BA67B-DD6A-415A-B47D-65F88D6A857E@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jcardcal/5Ue6JL7Suso_hTaaYY2nmuWngdE
Cc: "draft-ietf-jcardcal-jcal@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-jcardcal-jcal@tools.ietf.org>, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>, "jcardcal@ietf.org" <jcardcal@ietf.org>, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
Subject: Re: [Jcardcal] [Gen-art] Genart LC review: draft-ietf-jcardcal-jcal-09
X-BeenThere: jcardcal@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: JSON data formats for vCard and iCalendar WG <jcardcal.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/jcardcal>, <mailto:jcardcal-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/jcardcal/>
List-Post: <mailto:jcardcal@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:jcardcal-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jcardcal>, <mailto:jcardcal-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 17:40:30 -0000

On 3/27/14, 11:19 AM, Philipp Kewisch wrote:
>
>> On Mar 27, 2014, at 17:58, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/26/14, 5:31 AM, Philipp Kewisch wrote:
>>> I have just uploaded a new version of the document, it contains all
>>> considerations from the Gen-ART and secdir review, as well as changes
>>> based on the IESG evaluations.
>>>
>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-jcardcal-jcal-10.txt
>>>
>>> There are still 1-2 issues where I am waiting on email replies, but I
>>> wanted to have a version ready for the IESG Telechat tomorrow.
>>
>> Have you received replies to those email messages?
> I have answered all emails I am aware of. I also mentioned the new version on this gen-art thread.

Great.

>>> To jcarcal folks: I'd apprecicate if you could take a look at
>>> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jcardcal/trac/ and comment on the
>>> outstanding issues.
>>
>> I looked at the issues you posted here:
>>
>> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jcardcal/trac/report/1
>>
>> I think 66 and 68 can be closed because they were fixed in version -10, right?
> Yes, I believe so too.
>
>>
>> I think 69 deserves to be wontfix, because it's easy enough to find the relevant ABNF constructions in RFC 7159. However, for completeness you could list them individually. As far as I can see, the constructions we include are:
>>
>> begin-array
>> begin-object
>> end-array
>> end-object
>> name-separator
>> value-separator
>> string
>> number
>> true
>> false
> I don't mind mentioning these, I can upload a new version with this if you like. Or can we have this added by the editor?

I think we can handle this as an RFC Editor note (via Pete, our AD) or 
during AUTH48. Feel free to add it to your XML source (or Markdown or 
whatever you use) so you don't forget. :-)

Peter