Re: [VCARDDAV] Questions about text handling in vCard 4.0 (rev 11)

Simon Perreault <> Mon, 05 July 2010 13:14 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 358CC3A6985 for <>; Mon, 5 Jul 2010 06:14:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p9XO5Ttqnfxj for <>; Mon, 5 Jul 2010 06:14:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000:226:55ff:fe57:14db]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 124093A68F3 for <>; Mon, 5 Jul 2010 06:14:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown [IPv6:2620:0:230:c000:bdb0:8f1a:5923:50ac]) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DCFBB20E01; Mon, 5 Jul 2010 09:14:42 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 09:13:03 -0400
From: Simon Perreault <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100430 Fedora/3.0.4-2.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Daisuke Miyakawa <>
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-2022-JP"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [VCARDDAV] Questions about text handling in vCard 4.0 (rev 11)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF vcarddav wg mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 13:14:43 -0000

On 2010-07-05 09:00, Daisuke Miyakawa wrote:
> I think "undefined" does not help actual receivers. They will have to
> cope with real senders which often have some bugs. Almost all of the
> bugs are unexpected, but some can be, like this time. At least, we are
> able to reduce the possibility of ambiguity now.
> When my developing a receiver for vCard 3.0, I found some really
> well-known sender  (please let me make the application's name secret..)
> encoded texts wrongly using '\', and I had to decide on how to handle
> it, as receiver's behavior was "undefined" while actually it is easily
> detected.
> I don't think just one tiny mistake in sender side should make receivers
> confused.

Can you please suggest text for what you have in mind? Probably a
sentence or two to be added at the end of 3.3...?

> This time, on the other hand, we cannot see the value without encoding
> (" \x3000 " is much easier to read than "   "). Making the ambiguity
> around spaces and control characters visible is feasible enough, I suppose.

I disagree again. If you are using a given character in a sentence,
whether it is visible or not, it is because you intend the recipient to
read it. Otherwise, the character would not be useful and would not be
present. For example, in this paragraph I used many spaces which are
invisible and I don't think we would gain anything by replacing them
with \x20 in a vCard. We are encoding user-readable text in vCard, not
random bits.

NAT64/DNS64 open-source -->
STUN/TURN server        -->
vCard 4.0               -->