I am told by Dave the old and new version is addressing my comments. I am not judging that myself. My comment as liaison to Unicode is addressed by Adam (or similar fix). The issue I saw is understood. I am now not going to comment more on this document. Patrik > On 25 Feb 2021, at 20:11, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Patrik, as I understand our off-list conversation, a couple of minor > text changes would satisfy you that the document is being clear about > these issues. Is it possible for you to suggest specific text that > the authors can consider? I'm sure the authors will be happy to add > some text that clarifies things, and I'll hold the final approval on > the document briefly, to allow for that. > > Barry > >> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 1:35 PM Patrik Fältström >> <paf=40frobbit.se@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> >>>> On 25 Feb 2021, at 19:29, Adam Roach <adam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> The considerations for these display elements need to be exactly as complex as the display considerations for Unicode in email bodies, and no more. >> >> Then why does it not have the same characteristics as any mime body part with Unicode content? >> >> It is exactly where the boundary is between code points that are allowed and not you have the key issues here. >> >> The draft DO refer to very specific rules that are to be followed. >> >> If it was not, I would not be as worried. >> >> Patrik >> >> -- >> last-call mailing list >> last-call@xxxxxxxx >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
