Hi Robert, Consider it done!
Thank you, Sarah Tarrant RFC Production Center > On Jan 14, 2026, at 7:54 AM, Robert Stepanek <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Sarah, > > thanks, I think your suggestion makes it more clear to the reader! > > Robert > > On Wed, Jan 14, 2026, at 2:51 PM, Sarah Tarrant wrote: >> >> >> 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]
