Re: [VCARDDAV] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6350 (4261)
Simon Perreault <sperreault@jive.com> Mon, 02 March 2015 14:46 UTC
Return-Path: <sperreault@jive.com>
X-Original-To: vcarddav@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: vcarddav@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C63D1A87C1 for <vcarddav@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 06:46:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.378
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.378 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_36=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 zFv4gC-IDhVl for <vcarddav@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 06:46:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-la0-f50.google.com (mail-la0-f50.google.com [209.85.215.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 998531A87C0 for <vcarddav@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 06:46:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by labgm9 with SMTP id gm9so30741624lab.2 for <vcarddav@ietf.org>; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 06:46:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=5QkgBVhN2C4MFiBsfyX8XxlcWzCySbeNvVL7jMpCa54=; b=VFgFfbMUShIC898Zt0HY4EgWl1pF6eZMn/xgwf+7eYORg0LPDEIzbXw399qfkq7kbE EeXN7OV/n8xr9nMxMlIoP5gTN6Covr7xZwX3ZOn9D024GKyR1zarQHd+3Yz42FIZ9t/a /y/hJSsjxXp3hI5NCUqpyApApv3PO5wK0FQFadBDr0EQMnJQFi68SdP9Iob29+mWxhdI C571Uv70MViFQoGX4Uyub377tybBObNtZZOKwPkrBn7K2KOkhvPa+8geFcGNOFt6tbpV m/5mw2epaBDSz/g9nGGSj7WpyDMje6HSmv+kvPggJaoRSS+CgCFUVs/IabRWYZTTk5LK 9ddA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn/QwMZvQJNu1PkIPHAfH2+olrw2wXmfP5JTLEEwupSV2zo39sSoSdzU942KxiVOyxhErqu
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.207.72 with SMTP id lu8mr19729990lac.90.1425307594120; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 06:46:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.25.205.144 with HTTP; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 06:46:34 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJKgcUOKCrAwkbAnPHZxed1YXmL7EyB158Oh=K8EQrcZZA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20150205094201.123D81832B6@rfc-editor.org> <CALaySJKgcUOKCrAwkbAnPHZxed1YXmL7EyB158Oh=K8EQrcZZA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 09:46:34 -0500
Message-ID: <CANO7kWAZWfAsi4bnjUz3YUmSmWGoBkpmkQKZx-Use0NojyMZPA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Simon Perreault <sperreault@jive.com>
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11346650d7f0d805104f48f2"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/vcarddav/kvWSOTQ4WAOeG16Px262S_69_Q8>
Cc: ivan.enderlin@fruux.com, CardDAV <vcarddav@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [VCARDDAV] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6350 (4261)
X-BeenThere: vcarddav@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 14:46:38 -0000
This errata highlights a real problem that was not foreseen by the WG at the time when the RFC was published. Interoperability issues could result. Fixing the problem would require revising the RFC, possibly in a non-backward-compatible manner. The fix is not trivial and discussion would be necessary. Simon On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 6:29 AM, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote: > Simon, can you please comment on this errata report also? > > Thanks, > Barry > > On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 10:42 AM, RFC Errata System > <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote: > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6350, > > "vCard Format Specification". > > > > -------------------------------------- > > You may review the report below and at: > > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6350&eid=4261 > > > > -------------------------------------- > > Type: Technical > > Reported by: Ivan Enderlin <ivan.enderlin@fruux.com> > > > > Section: 4.3 > > > > Original Text > > ------------- > > In RFC6351 (Appendice A), we have a Relax NG Schema defining date and > > time format: > > > > # 4.3.1 > > value-date = element date { > > xsd:string { pattern = "\d{8}|\d{4}-\d\d|--\d\d(\d\d)?|---\d\d" } > > } > > > > # 4.3.2 > > value-time = element time { > > xsd:string { pattern = "(\d\d(\d\d(\d\d)?)?|-\d\d(\d\d?)|--\d\d)" > > ~ "(Z|[+\-]\d\d(\d\d)?)?" } > > } > > > > # 4.3.3 > > value-date-time = element date-time { > > xsd:string { pattern = "(\d{8}|--\d{4}|---\d\d)T\d\d(\d\d(\d\d)?)?" > > ~ "(Z|[+\-]\d\d(\d\d)?)?" } > > } > > > > # 4.3.4 > > value-date-and-or-time = value-date | value-date-time | value-time > > > > We assume this is the format from ISO.8601.2004 mentioned in RFC6350. > > There is no link on ISO.8601.2004 because ISO documents are not free. > > So this is our guess: These formats are very close based on different > > examples in RFC6350 and RFC6351. > > > > > > Corrected Text > > -------------- > > See notes. > > > > Notes > > ----- > > Question: --10 is October or 10 seconds? > > > > --10 can fit into value-date and value-time: > > > > * From value-date, the 3rd element in the disjunction is > --\d\d(\d\d)?, so it matches --10, > > * From value-time, the last element in the first disjunction is > --\d\d, so it matches --10. > > > > value-date-and-or-time matches value-date before value-time. Conclusion: > --10 is always October and never 10 seconds. Is it a technical error in the > RFC. > > > > > > PS: This erratum can be applied on RFC6350 and RFC6351. > > PPS: Consider the following erratum > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6351&eid=4247 on > value-time also. > > > > 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 (IESG) > > 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 (4… RFC Errata System
- Re: [VCARDDAV] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC635… Barry Leiba
- Re: [VCARDDAV] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC635… Simon Perreault
- [VCARDDAV] [Errata Held for Document Update] RFC6… RFC Errata System