-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 10/17/12 6:50 AM, Salvatore Loreto wrote: > On 10/16/12 5:01 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >> >> On 10/13/12 10:17 AM, Salvatore Loreto wrote: >>> I have reviewed the draft-ietf-precis-nickname-03 >> Hi Sal, thanks for the review! >> >>> the only concern I have is on the last sentence of Section 3. >>> Use in Application Protocols: >>> >>> Application protocols are also allowed to define >>> application-specific rules governing use of nicknames in the >>> relevant protocol slots (e.g., rules regarding the length of >>> nicknames). >>> >>> I am not sure "use" is the term here. The responsibilities of >>> the specific application protocol, that are of interest of this >>> draft, are those that would eventually extending the string >>> conformation constraints (e.g., rules regarding the length of >>> nicknames) , and that must not contradict the rules specified >>> in Section 2. However an application will also specify other >>> rules governing use of nicknames (e.g. some names are reserved, >>> prohibit to use etc.) but those are not of interest for this >>> draft as far as the string name conform to Section2. >> Let me see if I understand your point: there are rules about the >> nickname strings themselves (e.g., length, allowable characters, >> further restrictions to mitigate confusion about visually >> similar characters), and then there are rules about how nickname >> strings are employed in an application protocol (e.g., reserved >> nicknames, prohibited nicknames). >> >> How about rephrasing the sentence as follows... >> >> OLD This specification defines only the PRECIS-based rules for >> handling of nicknames. It is the responsibility of application >> protocols such as MSRP, XCON, and XMPP to specify which entities >> are expected to enforce these rules (e.g., chat servers, chat >> clients, or both). Application protocols are also allowed to >> define application-specific rules governing use of nicknames in >> the relevant protocol slots (e.g., rules regarding the length of >> nicknames). >> >> NEW This specification defines only the PRECIS-based rules for >> handling of nickname strings. It is the responsibility of an >> application protocol (e.g., MSRP, XCON, or XMPP) to specify the >> protocol slots in which nickname strings can appear, as well as >> the entities that are expected to enforce the rules governing >> nickname strings in that protocol (e.g., chat servers, chat >> clients, or both). Above and beyond the PRECIS-based rules >> specified here, application protocols can also define >> application-specific rules governing nickname strings (rules >> regarding the minimum or maximum length of nicknames, further >> restrictions on allowable characters or character ranges, >> safeguards to mitigate the effects of visually similar >> characters, etc.). Naturally, application protocols can also >> specify rules governing the actual use of nicknames in >> applications (reserved nicknames, authorization requirements for >> using nicknames, whether certain nicknames can be prohibited, >> handling of duplicates, the relationship between nicknames and >> underlying identifiers such as SIP URIs or JabberIDs, etc.). >> >> Better? > yes, it works for me
Excellent. I'll publish a revised I-D before the cut-off on Monday, with this new text and perhaps a few other small fixes (if I receive more feedback). > thanks a lot We aim to please! Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlB+vqcACgkQNL8k5A2w/vzrbgCfdDO4NAvek2Fp2/jtUg0UY2Xb x8IAn37mObwQKjImUizQAv/durAXAU3G =Fjbv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ precis mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis
