I'm having a little difficulty following the discussion of the text, so I
took a look at the text itself. It currently (-07) says:
The rule emoji_sequence is inherited from [Emoji-Seq]. It permits
one or more bytes to form a single presentation image.
The rule base-emojis MAY be used as
Hi, Kathleen, and thanks for the review. You left the document
shepherd and one of the editors off of the distribution list, so I'm
adding them in here. Because of that, I'm not doing the trimming that
I'd normally do in my inline reply.
Thanks.
...
Section 3.3, paragraph 6: remove
Section 3.3 third paragraph: NOT and neither form a double negative, the
phrase should use either instead of neither:
The server MUST NOT leave a message in either mailbox
Absolutely not! The double negative is quite necessary and
intentional. One possible outcome if the MOVE of a
Minor issues:
1.It is not clear from the draft what the use case for using the group
construct is. Section 3 talks about the issues with using the group
construct and recommend limited use, but this is the only information.
The main driver for this work is to add support for EAI
On 10/17/2012 10:49 AM, ned+i...@mauve.mrochek.com wrote:
Minor issues:
1. It is not clear from the draft what the use case for using the group
construct is. Section 3 talks about the issues with using the group
construct and recommend limited use, but this is the only information.
--On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:00 -0700
ned+i...@mauve.mrochek.com wrote:
A single sentence summarizing what benefit is achieved with
the change, along with a couple of usage examples, would go a
long way towards showing how this update helps in practical
ways.
I could live
On 10/17/2012 2:32 PM, Ned Freed wrote:
Channeling my inner Maslow, I see the present text as best, an additional
sentence or two as next best, a sentence and a cite to the downgrade doc next
in line, and including actual EAI examples in this doc as the worst choice.
The problem I have
Channeling my inner Maslow, I see the present text as best, an additional
sentence or two as next best, a sentence and a cite to the downgrade doc
next in line, and including actual EAI examples in this doc as the worst
choice.
The problem I have with the current text is that it says
On 09/19/2012 04:24 AM, Ben Campbell 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.
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:
On 10/20/2011 3:37 PM, Pete Resnick wrote:
So, if the limit is still 998, then there is no change with respect the
former
limit.
See the next sentence:
(Note that in
ASCII octets and characters are effectively the same but this is not
true in UTF-8.)
Remember, in UTF-8, characters
Document: draft-freed-sieve-notary-07
Reviewer: Spencer Dawkins
Review Date: 2010-04-05
IESG Telechat date: 2010-04-08
Summary: This draft is roughly ready for publication as a Proposed Standard.
I found one minor problem which MIGHT just be a cut-and-paste error, but
someone needs to look at
On Aug 16, 2009, at 11:01 AM, Ned Freed wrote:
[...]
it would be helpful to have a sentence or two somewhere (maybe
in the intro) to explicitly say so. My confusion might be around the
meaning of the term client in this context.
No, I think your confusion is that you read a lot more
(IETF list removed from cc list)
Comments:
A few minor nits that should not block anything:
-- Is this a sieve wg submission or and individual submission? The
title looks like an individual, but it's listed as a wg submission in
the datatracker. (The answer to this does not change my
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.
Document:
Hi Ned,
On 2008-03-28 14:55, Ned Freed wrote:
For domain, host and remote-host, since sieve strings are UTF-8,
are these items expressed in UTF-8 or in ACE encoding?
ACE encoding, of course. Nor do I believe this is worth calling out in this
context. Domains and hosts appear
16 matches
Mail list logo
