I just moved that document into an "approved" state, so changing it now
requires extra scrutiny to make sure those changes don't run afoul of a
claim that they have WG and IETF consensus.

Do all of these things meet that bar?

-MSK

On Sun, Mar 16, 2025 at 11:52 PM Daniel K. <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> https://github.com/ietf-wg-dmarc/draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting/pull/38
>
> A collection of fixes for things discussed on list, and in private.
>
> * 1729f98 Update intra-document references
>
> Resolving a mmark version issue between me and Alex.
>
> * 227ccd8 ABNF: add a space between RFC and the number
> * c82cdb9 ABNF: add references for undefined tokens
> * 7c8c916 ABNF: fix reference for ridtxt
> * a9bf296 ABNF: domain => domain-name
>
> Make https://author-tools.ietf.org/abnf happy.
>
> Also, replace the definition of domain from RFC 5322 in favour of
> domain-name defined in RFC 6376.
>
> * b01a050 Fix support for elements with a "lang" attribute
>
> Fix it, and expand to 5 elements.
> Please go over and see if you agree with my selection of elements. It
> should be quite easy to add or remove elements.
> Please make sure to update both the XSD and the prose if making changes.
>
> * 996ede2 Remove the self-reference
>
> Avoid adding self to the list of normative references.
>
> * 370191d policy record => DMARC policy Record
>
> Fix capitalization, funnily with a mis-capitalization in the commit
> message.
>
> * f9335a8 email => mail
>
> Fixing my previous commit that missed the "great email purge", changing
> all occurrences of email into mail.
>
>
> Daniel K.
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to