[VCARDDAV] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6350 (7061)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Fri, 29 July 2022 13:24 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfcpa.amsl.com>
X-Original-To: vcarddav@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: vcarddav@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7240C1345EC
for <vcarddav@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jul 2022 06:24:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.659
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.659 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.248,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001,
URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194])
by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id Hqv9fhL1KU9F for <vcarddav@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Fri, 29 Jul 2022 06:24:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (rfc-editor.org [50.223.129.200])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 367F1C15C513
for <vcarddav@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Jul 2022 06:24:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfcpa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 499)
id D12434C29E; Fri, 29 Jul 2022 06:24:37 -0700 (PDT)
To: simon.perreault@viagenie.ca, superuser@gmail.com,
francesca.palombini@ericsson.com, simon.perreault@viagenie.ca
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: murch@fastmailteam.com, vcarddav@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Message-Id: <20220729132437.D12434C29E@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2022 06:24:37 -0700 (PDT)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/vcarddav/6ezdW4KQBpLAodCUecaHLuV0An8>
Subject: [VCARDDAV] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6350 (7061)
X-BeenThere: vcarddav@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF vcarddav wg mailing list <vcarddav.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/vcarddav>,
<mailto:vcarddav-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/vcarddav/>
List-Post: <mailto:vcarddav@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:vcarddav-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vcarddav>,
<mailto:vcarddav-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2022 13:24:44 -0000
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6350, "vCard Format Specification". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7061 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Ken Murchison <murch@fastmailteam.com> Section: 8 Original Text ------------- TEL;VALUE=uri;TYPE="work,voice";PREF=1:tel:+1-418-656-9254;ext=102 TEL;VALUE=uri;TYPE="work,cell,voice,video,text":tel:+1-418-262-6501 Corrected Text -------------- TEL;VALUE=uri;TYPE=work,voice;PREF=1:tel:+1-418-656-9254;ext=102 TEL;VALUE=uri;TYPE=work,cell,voice,video,text:tel:+1-418-262-6501 Notes ----- While the given TYPE parameters are grammatically correct, in their current form they don't portray what I believe to be the intent of the example. In their current form, both TYPE parameters have just a single value because of the quoting. Since TYPE can be multi-valued, I believe the intent of the example was for these parameters to have 3 and 5 values respectively which is accomplished by the corrected text. Unfortunately, even though examples are only informative (the ABNF is always normative), the mistake in the example has led to implementations in the wild that perform the same quoting but also assume that the parameter should be treated as multi-valued. Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC6350 (draft-ietf-vcarddav-vcardrev-22) -------------------------------------- Title : vCard Format Specification Publication Date : August 2011 Author(s) : S. Perreault Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : vCard and CardDAV Area : Applications Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [VCARDDAV] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6350 (7… RFC Errata System
- Re: [VCARDDAV] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC635… Peter Saint-Andre