Hi Adrian, Thank you for your reply!
Sincerely, Sarah Tarrant RFC Production Center > On Mar 19, 2026, at 8:51 PM, Adrian Apthorp (DHL Express GHO) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Sarah, > > Yes, I'm happy to complete AUTH48 in GitHub. > > My userid is aapthorp > > Best regards > > Adrian > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, 20 March 2026 4:21 am > To: Michael Douglass <[email protected]>; Adrian Apthorp (DHL Express > GHO) <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected] > Subject: Re: Document intake questions about <draft-ietf-calext-ical-tasks-17> > > Hi Mike and Adrian, > > Mike - Thank you for your reply! > > Adrian - Regarding: > >>>>> 8) Would you like to participate in the RPC Pilot Test for >>>>> completing AUTH48 in GitHub? If so, please let us know and provide >>>>> all author, AD, and/or document shepherd GitHub usernames. For more >>>>> information about this experiment, see: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=rpc-github-phase-0-pilot-test. >> >> Mine is douglm. I'm happy to take part if others agree > > Would you like to complete AUTH48 in GitHub? > > Sincerely, > Sarah Tarrant > RFC Production Center > >> On Mar 19, 2026, at 1:24 PM, Michael Douglass <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> In that case I think we are good to go. There are some further responses >> below. >> >> On 3/19/26 11:49, Sarah Tarrant wrote: >>> Hi Michael, >>> >>> Thank you for your reply. Please review the following four items and let me >>> know if these suggestions are acceptable. Also, please make sure I didn't >>> miss anything. >>> >>> a) We can update the sourcecode type "bnf" to "abnf", so don't worry about >>> updating that on your end. >>> >>> b) As for the anchors, I don't believe there are any issues on our end. So, >>> no change there either. >>> >>> c) You're right about there not being a type "iCal" or "iCalendar". >>> However, media types are still an option: >>> https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml. Perhaps we >>> could use type "text/calendar" [RFC5545]? >>> >>> d) For the " ... is replaced by ..." formatting, we would suggest >>> formatting both as block quotes (<blockquote>), as that is standard for >>> OLD/NEW elements. With your approval, we can make that change on our end. >> Please go ahead with these changes - thank you. >>> >>> Sincerely, >>> Sarah Tarrant >>> RFC Production Center >>> >>>> On Mar 18, 2026, at 4:23 PM, Michael Douglass <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> One initial question below at point 5 - sourcecode On 3/17/26 16:01, >>>> Sarah Tarrant wrote: >>>>> Author(s), >>>>> >>>>> Congratulations, your document has been successfully added to the RFC >>>>> Editor queue! >>>>> The team at the RFC Production Center (RPC) is looking forward to >>>>> working with you as your document moves forward toward publication. >>>>> To help reduce processing time and improve editing accuracy, please >>>>> respond to the questions below. Please confer with your coauthors >>>>> (or authors of other documents if your document is in a >>>>> cluster) as necessary prior to taking action in order to streamline >>>>> communication. >>>>> If your document has multiple authors, only one author needs to >>>>> reply to this message. >>>>> >>>>> As you read through the rest of this email: >>>>> >>>>> * If you need/want to make updates to your document, we encourage >>>>> you to make those changes and resubmit to the Datatracker. This >>>>> allows for the easy creation of diffs, which facilitates review by >>>>> interested parties (e.g., authors, ADs, doc shepherds). >>>>> * If you feel no updates to the document are necessary, please >>>>> reply with any applicable rationale/comments. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Please note that the RPC team will not work on your document until >>>>> we hear from you (that is, your document will remain in AUTH state >>>>> until we receive a reply). Even if you don't have guidance or don't >>>>> feel that you need to make any updates to the document, you need to >>>>> let us know. After we hear from you, your document will start >>>>> moving through the queue. You will be able to review and approve our >>>>> updates during AUTH48. >>>>> >>>>> Please feel free to contact us with any questions you may have at >>>>> [email protected]. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you! >>>>> The RPC Team >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> 1) As there may have been multiple updates made to the document >>>>> during Last Call, please review the current version of the document: >>>>> >>>>> * Is the text in the Abstract still accurate? >>>>> * Are the Authors' Addresses, Contributors, and Acknowledgments >>>>> sections current? >> All ok. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2) Please share any style information that could help us with >>>>> editing your document. For example: >>>>> >>>>> * Is your document's format or its terminology based on another >>>>> document, WG style guide, etc.? If so, please provide a pointer to >>>>> that information (e.g., "This document's terminology should match >>>>> DNS terminology in RFC 9499." or "This document uses the style info >>>>> at <https://httpwg.org/admin/editors/style-guide>."). >>>>> * Is there a general pattern of capitalization or formatting of >>>>> terms that editors can follow (e.g., "Field names should have initial >>>>> capitalization." >>>>> or "Parameter names should be in double quotes." or "<tt/> should >>>>> be used for token names." etc.)? >> We tried to follow 5545 as regards all those style issues. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 3) Please carefully review the entries and their URLs in the >>>>> References section with the following in mind. Note that we will >>>>> update as follows unless we hear otherwise at this time: >>>>> >>>>> * References to obsoleted RFCs will be updated to point to the >>>>> current RFC on the topic in accordance with Section 4.8.6 of RFC >>>>> 7322 (RFC Style Guide). >>>>> >>>>> * References to I-Ds that have been replaced by another I-D will be >>>>> updated to point to the replacement I-D. >>>>> >>>>> * References to documents from other organizations that have been >>>>> superseded will be updated to their superseding version. >>>>> >>>>> Note: To check for outdated RFC and I-D references, you can use >>>>> idnits <https://author-tools.ietf.org/idnits>. You can also help >>>>> the IETF Tools Team by testing idnits3 >>>>> <https://author-tools.ietf.org/idnits3/> >>>>> with your document and reporting any issues to them. >> Done - no issues >>>>> >>>>> 4) Is there any text that requires special handling? For example: >>>>> * Are there any sections that were contentious when the document was >>>>> drafted? >>>>> * Are any sections that need to be removed before publication >>>>> marked as such (e.g., Implementation Status sections (per RFC 7942)). >>>>> * Are there any instances of repeated text/sections that should be >>>>> edited the same way? >> No special handling >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 5) This document contains sourcecode: >>>>> >>>>> * Does the sourcecode validate? >>>>> * Some sourcecode types (e.g., YANG) require certain references >>>>> and/or text in the Security Considerations section. Is this information >>>>> correct? >>>>> * Is the sourcecode type indicated in the XML? (See information >>>>> about >>>>> types: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=sourcecode-types.) >>>> The source document is written in asciidoc and uses metanorma to process. >>>> I set the wrong type for abnf (I used "bnf") - can correct that. >>>> However, the asciidoc generates something like this for examples: >>>> <sourcecode >>>> anchor="_e6e8329f-2f53-d95b-f684-b559638b5f76"><![CDATA[REASON:https >>>> ://example.com/reason/delivered-on-time]]></sourcecode> >>>> >>>> This was generated by the asciidoc >>>> [source] >>>> ---- >>>> REASON:https://example.com/reason/delivered-on-time >>>> >>>> ---- >>>> >>>> >>>> How should examples be represented in XML? The above is actually iCalendar >>>> but there's no type for that. >>>> All the sourcecode elements except the following are icalendar, xml or >>>> abnf. I do have this: >>>> <sourcecode anchor="_eacbea81-341f-ff8c-8998-b0e7d3618e47"><![CDATA[ >>>> A "VTODO" calendar component without the "DTSTART" and "DUE" (or >>>> "DURATION") properties specifies a to-do that will be associated >>>> with each successive calendar date, until it is >>>> completed.]]></sourcecode> >>>> >>>> >>>> <t anchor="_b319a19b-d7da-8c18-c509-476f7e6b69fe">is replaced by</t> >>>> >>>> <sourcecode anchor="_3445301e-5b67-5b5d-2dfd-8d6ef6f7c96d"><![CDATA[ A >>>> "VTODO" calendar component without the "DTSTART" and "DUE" >>>> properties specifies a to-do that will be associated with each >>>> successive calendar date, until it is completed.]]></sourcecode> >>>> >>>> </section> >>>> >>>> This is replacement text for 5545 and I guess I'm looking for some >>>> sort of preformatted text option. This appears at the end of section >>>> 11.1 >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> 6) Because this document updates RFC 5545, please review the >>>>> reported errata and confirm whether they have been addressed in >>>>> this document or are not relevant: >>>>> >>>>> * RFC 5545 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/rfc5545) >> Done >>>>> >>>>> 7) Would you like to participate in the RPC Pilot Test for editing in >>>>> kramdown-rfc? >>>>> If so, please let us know and provide a self-contained kramdown-rfc >>>>> file. For more information about this experiment, see: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc. >> Not at this time. >>>>> >>>>> 8) Would you like to participate in the RPC Pilot Test for >>>>> completing AUTH48 in GitHub? If so, please let us know and provide >>>>> all author, AD, and/or document shepherd GitHub usernames. For more >>>>> information about this experiment, see: >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=rpc-github-phase-0-pilot-test. >> Mine is douglm. I'm happy to take part if others agree >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 9) Is there anything else that the RPC should be aware of while >>>>> editing this document? >> >> No >> >> Thank you - Mike >> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Mar 17, 2026, at 2:57 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Author(s), >>>>>> >>>>>> Your document draft-ietf-calext-ical-tasks-17, which has been >>>>>> approved for publication as an RFC, has been added to the RFC >>>>>> Editor queue <https://www.rfc-editor.org/current_queue.php>. >>>>>> >>>>>> If your XML file was submitted using the I-D submission tool >>>>>> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/>, we have already retrieved >>>>>> it and have started working on it. >>>>>> >>>>>> If you did not submit the file via the I-D submission tool, or if >>>>>> you have an updated version (e.g., updated contact information), >>>>>> please send us the file at this time by attaching it in your reply >>>>>> to this message and specifying any differences between the >>>>>> approved I-D and the file that you are providing. >>>>>> >>>>>> You will receive a separate message from us asking for style input. >>>>>> Please respond to that message. When we have received your >>>>>> response, your document will then move through the queue. The >>>>>> first step that we take as your document moves through the queue >>>>>> is converting it to RFCXML (if it is not already in RFCXML) and >>>>>> applying the formatting steps listed at >>>>>> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/pubprocess/how-we-update/>. >>>>>> Next, we will edit for clarity and apply the style guide >>>>>> (<https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/>). >>>>>> >>>>>> You can check the status of your document at >>>>>> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/current_queue.php>. >>>>>> >>>>>> You will receive automatic notifications as your document changes >>>>>> queue state (for more information about these states, please see >>>>>> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/queue/>). When we have completed >>>>>> our edits, we will move your document to AUTH48 state and ask you >>>>>> to perform a final review of the document. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please let us know if you have any questions. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you. >>>>>> >>>>>> The RFC Editor Team >>>>>> >>>>>> > -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
