IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [xmpp] Cross-WG WGLC of draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-18

Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> Mon, 09 March 2015 22:30 UTC

Return-Path: <dave@cridland.net>
X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22A2A1A8830 for <xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 15:30:37 -0700 (PDT)
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, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 AnV0nad1vFZt for <xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 15:30:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x231.google.com (mail-oi0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::231]) (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 1AECE1A8A7B for <xmpp@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 15:30:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by oiav1 with SMTP id v1so32223955oia.9 for <xmpp@ietf.org>; Mon, 09 Mar 2015 15:30:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cridland.net; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=RPeZ13VcAtByOSoupcoyZa+nZbAog9ybTIJtB3Dcg4M=; b=LBPMOFEnnYrmjBcZQID6qGz3HRBxudSEu81hwVBhzJgAXPkOabbe1Kj+5uZyYHoCcV pQUEh9GSmd2RjB5MKcCY4pFVigePJykPEFQnR29KC4oTHfxSOL56f47LDxo5viS3ZmEn ZRWTwuVQXQ5aF8z9VA+u0a4RgP6Vm4w6L71Lw=
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=RPeZ13VcAtByOSoupcoyZa+nZbAog9ybTIJtB3Dcg4M=; b=RgbZADrolWNySKhN4XXeyUC5+Nw5Wd0z8maumwR9ZTKBNO0S9Omfwv21zL/7sIvF+y VrY1SBrKuxjrMM2yuKn6D69HyIuMyS1FVqjxyXbDvfa8kRnvq7nuIT0LSwcWknc0aLgc grkNaFgBvWoMa6MOnxVoa26fKsPlZHwPwh0xzRjALdpHySG3PgiZKXPYyxNL0oabZu3b KesMhNCa9z0SH0kTreNhozAOvdo37u4W3HJGFpy2t2FMUdPikTWM+aGpTsoVobTsi595 jaD31ghyN2COgRQjLOvpfR98UVQriSYKBbH7djWIbrhw2y/Xd7YsMCdXKGVDzDExD2HF 4G0A==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkuLrKK+rjr0ky2pKILwGDaZ22WDvh1/BKQ8qaW0RVmkWOmvvwNI9yA7y+bJ1T0YszhbTIG
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.51.165 with SMTP id l5mr23429735oeo.69.1425940235560; Mon, 09 Mar 2015 15:30:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.60.62.172 with HTTP; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 15:30:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <54FE14B7.8020601@andyet.net>
References: <98C92FA8-F99C-4861-9199-7B0443506574@nostrum.com> <CAKHUCzw7AXmnNy1LF3y4sv2bQRg-K+eLpszNSxfBaxngsmskQg@mail.gmail.com> <54FE14B7.8020601@andyet.net>
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 22:30:35 +0000
Message-ID: <CAKHUCzxaKpD3S1Q02bx9Ow97gdwB6NPNN9BZFS6N5uP0rJ6SUQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
To: Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <peter@andyet.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c3093a363e370510e29503"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xmpp/CI-nFJ2Evz_ZgywHUedmH1HpVhA>
Cc: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, XMPP Group <xmpp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [xmpp] Cross-WG WGLC of draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-18
X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: XMPP Working Group <xmpp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/xmpp/>
List-Post: <mailto:xmpp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 22:30:37 -0000

On 9 March 2015 at 21:46, Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <peter@andyet.net> wrote:

> 3) "angle brackets"
>>
>> The presence of angle brackets in example 16 is, I think, more confusing
>> than the thing it's attempting to solve; in part because the < does
>> indeed make the jid illegal under §3.3.1, so I didn't initially read the
>> explanation...
>>
>
> I think it would be best for all of the examples to be enclosed in angle
> brackets (this is what we did in the precis-nickname spec).


Yes, that would also work for me.

Dave.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email