Hi Robert, Thank you for clarifying!
Typically when we format NEW text with a blockquote, we also include the OLD text in a blockquote. What would you say to something like the following: CURRENT: > *uid: String (optional).* > > The remaining property definition is left unchanged, with the > following additional paragraph: > > | A Card without an uid property can not be referred to as group > | member in the members property [RFC9553] (Section 2.1.6), or put > | in relation to another Card object in the relatedTo property > | [RFC9553] (Section 2.1.8). PERHAPS: > OLD: > | *uid: String (mandatory).* > > NEW: > | *uid: String (optional).* > > The remaining property definition is left unchanged, with the > following additional paragraph: > > | A Card without an uid property can not be referred to as group > | member in the members property [RFC9553] (Section 2.1.6), or put > | in relation to another Card object in the relatedTo property > | [RFC9553] (Section 2.1.8). Forgive my attempt at drawing the text output in an email. Thoughts? Sarah Tarrant RFC Production Center > On Jan 14, 2026, at 7:36 AM, Robert Stepanek <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Sarah, > > On Wed, Jan 14, 2026, at 2:24 PM, Sarah Tarrant wrote: >> >> >> > I just noticed a nit in formatting section 4: >> Just for my own sanity, which format of line breaking (or not) are you >> preferring? We can do either! >> a) https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-calext-jscontact-uid-07.html >> b) >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-calext-jscontact-uid-07#section-4 > > > I prefer the formatting in a), it clearly separates the updated type > signature from the next sentence. Thinking about it, using a "blockquote" XML > tag might even be appropriate also for the updated type signature. > > Thanks, > Robert > -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
