I have just uploaded a new version of the document, it contains all considerations from the Gen-ART and secdir review, as well as changes based on the IESG evaluations.
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-jcardcal-jcal-10.txt There are still 1-2 issues where I am waiting on email replies, but I wanted to have a version ready for the IESG Telechat tomorrow. To jcarcal folks: I'd apprecicate if you could take a look at http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jcardcal/trac/ and comment on the outstanding issues. Philipp On 3/26/14, 9:43 AM, Philipp Kewisch wrote: > I will upload a new draft today that incorporates changes from various > reviews. > > Philipp > > On 3/26/14, 7:28 AM, Jari Arkko wrote: >> Thanks for the review, Robert. Some changes are being discussed, but I do >> not see a new draft. Shouldn't that appear before we make the final approval >> of this document? >> >> Jari >> >> On Mar 12, 2014, at 2:55 AM, Robert Sparks <[email protected]> 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-ietf-jcardcal-jcal-09 >>> Reviewer: Robert Sparks >>> Review Date: 11Mar2014 >>> IETF LC End Date: 12Mar2014 >>> IESG Telechat date: 27Mar2014 >>> >>> Summary: Ready with nits >>> >>> This is a solid document, and its development has left good artifacts >>> showing a pattern of careful review. >>> (such as <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jcardcal/trac/report/6>). >>> >>> Here are some nits to consider: >>> >>> I agree with moving the reference to RFC4627 to normative, as already >>> discussed. >>> >>> Please consider adding a reference to clarify "JSON escaping" where it is >>> mentioned in the 2nd paragraph of page 5. >>> Perhaps section 2.5 of rfc4627 would be a good reference? >>> >>> The MUST in the third paragraph of 3.4.1.1 stuck out - is looks like a >>> restatement of RFC5545 - that spec doesn't _allow_ anything but a semicolon >>> for this particular separator. Would this be better written without 2119? >>> Perhaps: "When converting from jCal to iCalendar, be careful to use a >>> semi-colon as the separator between the two values as required by RFC5545." >>> >>> (This may be more than a nit): In the ABNF in section 3.6.5, where is the >>> implementer supposed to go to find the definition of 'zone'? (Or the other >>> production names?) I think _this_ chunk of ABNF (as opposed to that >>> compiled in the appendix) is intended to be normative, yes? FWIW, it's not >>> reflected in Appendix B. >>> >>> I haven't extracted the BNF in appendix B and verified it, but it must fail >>> - there is at least one typo. The expansion of param-multi includes >>> "value-separtor" which should have been "value-separator". >>> Where is value-separator defined? >>> >>> Just curious - has anyone tried converting a document from >>> iCal->xCal->jCal->iCal? That might turn up some interesting corners that >>> simple round-tripping might mask. >>> >>> To try to save other reviewers some time, here are a couple of things I >>> flagged that turned out to be non-issues: >>> * I was concerned with whether there would be issues with the forced >>> conversion between upper and lower case. A little digging shows there is no >>> issue - all the names this is done to are limited to the ascii-compatible >>> characters. >>> * I verified that the syntax numbers with fractional parts is the same in >>> both iCal in jCal. Specifically "4." is not valid in either grammar, so >>> there is no need to discuss something like adding a 0 or remove the decimal >>> point during conversion. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gen-art mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art >> _______________________________________________ >> jcardcal mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jcardcal _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
