Hi Orie and Tim, Thanks for your replies. We have noted Orie’s approval of Section 2 on the AUTH48 status page (https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9839).
We now await replies to the questions from the authors. Best regards, Karen Moore RFC Production Center > On Aug 14, 2025, at 6:15 AM, Orie via auth48archive > <auth48archive@rfc-editor.org> wrote: > > I approve the changes to the ABNF, I recall the reason for these changes is > related to XML typo. > > I also have a note from Rob > > """ > Section 3: > "For example, the following is a conforming JSON text:" > > Section 5: > "the example would remain a conforming JSON Text" > > I think "text" should be lowercase in both instances, but they should match. > """ > > Has this comment been addressed? > > Regards, > > OS, ART AD > > On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 6:04 PM <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org> wrote: > Authors and *AD, > > While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as necessary) > the following questions, which are also in the XML file. > > *AD, please review question #4. > > 1) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that appear in > the title) for use on https://www.rfc-editor.org/search. --> > > > 2) <!--[rfced] FYI: In Section 2, we updated the enlarged "⨉" to "*" > for multiplication as the enlarged "⨉" is not used in the RFC > Series. If "x" (lowercase) is preferred instead of "*", please > let us know. > > Original: > There are 1,114,112 (17 ⨉ 2^16) code points;... > > Current: > There are 1,114,112 (17 * 2^16) code points;... > --> > > > 3) <!--[rfced] Please clarify this sentence - does option A or B capture > the intended meaning, or do you prefer otherwise? > > Original: > Unicode describes a variety of encoding forms, ways to marshal code > points into byte sequences. > > Perhaps A: > Unicode describes a variety of encoding forms and ways to > marshal code points into byte sequences. > > Perhaps B: > Unicode describes a variety of encoding forms that can be used to > marshal code points into byte sequences. > --> > > > 4) <!--[rfced] AD: As requested by the authors, we made the following > update within the sourcecode in Section 2 (see the last > line). Please review and provide your approval of this change. > > Original: > xml-character = > %x9 / %xA / %xD / ; useful controls > %x20-D7FF / ; exclude surrogates > %xE000-FFFD / ; exclude FFFE and FFFF nonchars > %x100000-10FFFF > > Current: > xml-character = > %x9 / %xA / %xD / ; useful controls > %x20-D7FF / ; exclude surrogates > %xE000-FFFD / ; exclude FFFE and FFFF nonchars > %x10000-10FFFF > --> > > > 5) <!--[rfced] FYI: As requested by the authors, we made the following > update in Section 6: > > Original: > ...the example would remain a conforming JSON Text but... > > Current: > ...the example would remain a conforming JSON text but... > --> > > > 6) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "type" attribute of each sourcecode element > in the XML file to ensure correctness. If the current list of preferred > values for "type" > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=sourcecode-types) > does not contain an applicable type, then feel free to let us know. > Also, it is acceptable to leave the "type" attribute not set. > --> > > > 7) <!-- [rfced] Some author comments are present in the XML. Please confirm > that > no updates related to these comments are outstanding. Note that the > comments will be deleted prior to publication. > --> > > > 8) <!-- [rfced] FYI - We have added expansions for the following abbreviations > per Section 3.6 of RFC 7322 ("RFC Style Guide"). Please review each > expansion in the document carefully to ensure correctness. > > Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) > Internet JSON (I-JSON) > --> > > > 9) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "Inclusive Language" portion of the online > Style Guide <https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/#inclusive_language> > and let us know if any changes are needed. Updates of this nature typically > result in more precise language, which is helpful for readers. > > Note that our script did not flag any words in particular, but this should > still be reviewed as a best practice. > --> > > > Thank you. > > RFC Editor/kc > > > On Aug 13, 2025, at 3:57 PM, RFC Editor via auth48archive > <auth48archive@rfc-editor.org> wrote: > > *****IMPORTANT***** > > Updated 2025/08/13 > > RFC Author(s): > -------------- > > Instructions for Completing AUTH48 > > Your document has now entered AUTH48. Once it has been reviewed and > approved by you and all coauthors, it will be published as an RFC. > If an author is no longer available, there are several remedies > available as listed in the FAQ (https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/). > > You and you coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties > (e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before providing > your approval. > > Planning your review > --------------------- > > Please review the following aspects of your document: > > * RFC Editor questions > > Please review and resolve any questions raised by the RFC Editor > that have been included in the XML file as comments marked as > follows: > > <!-- [rfced] ... --> > > These questions will also be sent in a subsequent email. > > * Changes submitted by coauthors > > Please ensure that you review any changes submitted by your > coauthors. We assume that if you do not speak up that you > agree to changes submitted by your coauthors. > > * Content > > Please review the full content of the document, as this cannot > change once the RFC is published. Please pay particular attention to: > - IANA considerations updates (if applicable) > - contact information > - references > > * Copyright notices and legends > > Please review the copyright notice and legends as defined in > RFC 5378 and the Trust Legal Provisions > (TLP – https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). > > * Semantic markup > > Please review the markup in the XML file to ensure that elements of > content are correctly tagged. For example, ensure that <sourcecode> > and <artwork> are set correctly. See details at > <https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary>. > > * Formatted output > > Please review the PDF, HTML, and TXT files to ensure that the > formatted output, as generated from the markup in the XML file, is > reasonable. Please note that the TXT will have formatting > limitations compared to the PDF and HTML. > > > Submitting changes > ------------------ > > To submit changes, please reply to this email using ‘REPLY ALL’ as all > the parties CCed on this message need to see your changes. The parties > include: > > * your coauthors > > * rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org (the RPC team) > > * other document participants, depending on the stream (e.g., > IETF Stream participants are your working group chairs, the > responsible ADs, and the document shepherd). > > * auth48archive@rfc-editor.org, which is a new archival mailing list > to preserve AUTH48 conversations; it is not an active discussion > list: > > * More info: > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc > > * The archive itself: > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/ > > * Note: If only absolutely necessary, you may temporarily opt out > of the archiving of messages (e.g., to discuss a sensitive matter). > If needed, please add a note at the top of the message that you > have dropped the address. When the discussion is concluded, > auth48archive@rfc-editor.org will be re-added to the CC list and > its addition will be noted at the top of the message. > > You may submit your changes in one of two ways: > > An update to the provided XML file > — OR — > An explicit list of changes in this format > > Section # (or indicate Global) > > OLD: > old text > > NEW: > new text > > You do not need to reply with both an updated XML file and an explicit > list of changes, as either form is sufficient. > > We will ask a stream manager to review and approve any changes that seem > beyond editorial in nature, e.g., addition of new text, deletion of text, > and technical changes. Information about stream managers can be found in > the FAQ. Editorial changes do not require approval from a stream manager. > > > Approving for publication > -------------------------- > > To approve your RFC for publication, please reply to this email stating > that you approve this RFC for publication. Please use ‘REPLY ALL’, > as all the parties CCed on this message need to see your approval. > > > Files > ----- > > The files are available here: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839.xml > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839.pdf > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839.txt > > Diff file of the text: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839-diff.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839-rfcdiff.html (side by side) > > Diff of the XML: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9839-xmldiff1.html > > > Tracking progress > ----------------- > > The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9839 > > Please let us know if you have any questions. > > Thank you for your cooperation, > > RFC Editor > > -------------------------------------- > RFC9839 (draft-bray-unichars-15) > > Title : Unicode Character Repertoire Subsets > Author(s) : T. Bray, P. Hoffman > WG Chair(s) : > Area Director(s) : > > > -- > auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org > To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org > > -- > auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org > To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org -- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
