Erik, thanks for your review. I entered a DISCUSS position to ask an IPR question and pointed to your review.
Alissa > On Nov 13, 2018, at 11:53 PM, Erik Kline <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 20:23, Dale R. Worley <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Erik Kline <[email protected]> writes: >>> Nits/editorial comments: I can't help but wonder if an example or two >>> wouldn't >>> round out the document. But maybe leaptofrogans: URIs/IRIs aren't amenable >>> to >>> constructing an example? >> >> I agree in principle with this. Looking at reference [IFAP], here are >> two examples: >> >> leaptofrogans:mynetwork*mysite >> leaptofrogans:my-network*MySite >> >> The syntax of frogan addresses is very carefully specified, but most of >> the work seems to revolve around using Unicode well: Frogans are fully >> internationalized, so there's a lot of work in [IFAP] specifying how to >> use Unicode so that an address aligns with the intuitive sense of "a >> text string". >> >> But beyond the fact that a frogan address is split into two parts by a >> "*" character, there isn't much syntax that's easily displayed by a >> series of ASCII examples. > > I understand about the limitations of the current RFC format w.r.t. > non-ASCII characters (but I suspect you wouldn't want to wait for the > new format to be readily available :-). > > FWIW I think those two examples would be perfectly fine. They may not > seem overly expressive or especially illustrative, but including them > might scratch an itch for some readers. > > But it's certainly not anything worth holding up publication for, IMHO. > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art > <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
