On 11/30/12 11:37 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Hi Vijay and Gonzalo,
>
> Agreed, that change in the introduction makes sense.
>
> As to FN, how about this?
>
> OLD
> o The device itself (e.g., the FN property might represent the
> hostname of a computing device, the URL property might represent a
> website that contains details on where to find documentation or
> get further information about the device, the KEY property might
> represent a digital certificate that was provisioned into the
> device at the time of manufacture [IEEE.802.1AR], or a public key
> certificate previously provisioned into the device, and the ADR,
> GEO, and TZ properties might represent the physical address,
> geographical location, and timezone where the device is deployed).
>
> NEW
> o The device itself. For example, the FN ("full name") property
> ([RFC6250, section 2.1) might represent the hostname of a computing
> device, the URL property might represent a website that contains
> details on where to find documentation or get further information
> about the device, the KEY property might represent a digital
> certificate that was provisioned into the device at the time of
> manufacture [IEEE.802.1AR], or a public key certificate previously
> provisioned into the device, and the ADR, GEO, and TZ properties
> might represent the physical address, geographical location, and
> timezone where the device is deployed.
While I think you mean 6350 :-) I wonder do we need this reference? We
don't do the same for ADR, GEO, and TZ below. I don't mind the
parenthetical expansion. Would that not be sufficient?
Joe
>
> Peter
>
> On Nov 30, 2012, at 9:27 AM, Gonzalo Salgueiro wrote:
>
>> Vijay -
>>
>> Good to hear from you, my friend. Hope you are well.
>>
>> Thanks for the detailed review. As for your two nits:
>>
>> 1. I'm fine with the suggested edit and will update the next version (after
>> IETF LC) with the suggested changes.
>>
>> 2. FN is a well-known identification property for vCards and does expand to
>> "Full Name". Even in RFC 6350 it doesn't appear to be expanded, so I'll
>> likely continue that trend and simply add a reference section 6.2.1 of RFC
>> 6350 after the usage of FN to help the uninitiated in vCards. Is that OK
>> with you?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Gonzalo
>>
>> On Nov 30, 2012, at 9:50 AM, Vijay K. Gurbani wrote:
>>
>>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
>>> Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
>>> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>>>
>>> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
>>> you may receive.
>>>
>>> Document: draft-salgueiro-vcarddav-kind-device-06
>>> Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani
>>> Review Date: Nov-30-2012
>>> IETF LC End Date: Dec-26-2012
>>> IESG Telechat date: Unknown
>>>
>>> This document is ready as a Proposed Standard.
>>>
>>> Major: 0
>>> Minor: 0
>>> Nits: 2
>>>
>>> Nits:
>>>
>>> 1/ S1: The value "thing" sort of creeps up on you in the second
>>> paragraph. Upon further reading, it becomes more apparent that
>>> during the WG discussions "thing" was a meta-value (or super-
>>> class) and that "application" and "device" appear to be sub-
>>> classes (or specific values) of "thing"s.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, rf6473 already defined "application" and that this
>>> particular draft is now defining "device".
>>>
>>> To better impart this information, I would suggest the following
>>> simple modification
>>>
>>> OLD:
>>> ...Working Group defined values of "individual", "org", "group", and
>>> "location" for the KIND property. Additionally, [RFC6473] has
>>> defined a value of "application" for the KIND property to represent
>>> software applications.
>>>
>>> During working group discussion of the document that became
>>> [RFC6473], consideration was given to defining a more general value
>>> of "thing", but it was decided to split "thing" into software
>>> applications and hardware devices and to define only the
>>> "application" value at that time....
>>>
>>> NEW:
>>> ...Working Group defined values of "individual", "org", "group", and
>>> "location" for the KIND property.
>>>
>>> During working group discussion of the document that became
>>> [RFC6473], consideration was given to defining a more general value
>>> of "thing", but it was decided to split "thing" into software
>>> applications and hardware devices and to define only the
>>> "application" value at that time....
>>>
>>> 2/ S2, top of page 4: "FN" probably expands to "Full Name". If it is
>>> an accepted practice to use "FN" in your domain, then you can leave
>>> it unexpanded. If not, then an expansion may help the general reader
>>> (like me) who may think what "FN" is. (The rest of the properties
>>> listed on page 4 and 5 appear to be self-explanatory).
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> - vijay
>>> --
>>> Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
>>> 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
>>> Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / [email protected]
>>> Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/
>>>
>>
>
>
--
Joe Marcus Clarke, CCIE #5384, | |
SCJP, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, VCP ||||| |||||
Distinguished Services Engineer ..:|||||||||::|||||||||:..
Phone: +1 (919) 392-2867 c i s c o S y s t e m s
Email: [email protected]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
