I think only the expansion is fine. And yes, 6350. Typing too fast. :)

On Nov 30, 2012, at 9:41 AM, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:

> 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} / vijay.gurb...@alcatel-lucent.com
>>>> 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: jcla...@cisco.com
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Reply via email to