Re: [Slim] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-slim-multilangcontent-13: (with COMMENT)

[Nik Tomkinson <[e-mail]>]

Hi Mirja,

I have added some text and made some recommendations in a new version which
I have just submitted.

I think it suitably addresses the use case without adding too strong a
requirement to the specification.

Nik.

On 18 August 2017 at 09:49, Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Hi Nik,
>
> see below.
>
> > Am 18.08.2017 um 01:53 schrieb Nik Tomkinson <
> [e-mail]>:
> >
> > Hi Mirja,
> >
> > Regarding the mismatched email addresses, I'll have a think and add some
> text to the I-D.
>
> Great!
>
> >
> > Regarding the second point, the last paragraph in section 4 says that
> 'Additionally, interactive implementations MAY offer the user a choice from
> among the available languages'. Is this what you had in mind or do you
> think this should be also mentioned in the Security Considerations as a
> mitigating response to the risk?
>
> I was rather thinking about providing a way to see multiple or all
> languages. So that someone how speaks multiples languages or what to
> manually apply some translation system, could check if the content is the
> same. So yes, it would be good to mention this in the security
> considerations but there might also be other use case, e.g. I read it in my
> prefer language but there is some unclarity and reading another version in
> another language could help to clarify the meaning. So maybe it’s something
> you want to mention earlier as well and just refer to in the security
> considerations.
>
> Mirja
>
> >
> > Nik.
> >
> > On 15 August 2017 at 13:24, Mirja Kühlewind <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
> > draft-ietf-slim-multilangcontent-13: No Objection
> >
> > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> > introductory paragraph, however.)
> >
> >
> > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.
> html
> > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> >
> >
> > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-slim-multilangcontent/
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > COMMENT:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Minor comments:
> > - sec 3.2:
> > "If there is a From field present, its value MUST
> >    include the same email address as the top-level From header..."
> > What happen if they are no the same? The security considerations section
> > mentions this case but there is no guidance given what to do in this case
> > (which address to display)?
> >
> > - The security considerations section mentions the risk that the content
> might
> > actually be different in different languages. I think it would be nice
> to give
> > some recommendation that there SHOULD be a way for the user to see all
> content
> > fields.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > Multiple Language Content Type Internet Draft:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-slim-multilangcontent/
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> >
>
>


-- 

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Multiple Language Content Type Internet Draft:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-slim-multilangcontent/

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