Thanks for the comments: All useful - and yes - I'll add the confirmation code. I'll incorporate these changes On 4/23/19 09:02, Daniel Migault wrote:
Thanks for the review Rich! Yours, Daniel -----Original Message----- From: Rich Salz via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> Sent: Monday, April 22, 2019 2:14 PM To: secdir@xxxxxxxx Cc: draft-ietf-calext-eventpub-extensions.all@xxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx; calsify@xxxxxxxx Subject: Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-calext-eventpub-extensions-12 Reviewer: Rich Salz Review result: Has Nits This is the SECDIR last-call review, intended to be input to the Security AD's. Ready with nits. The Security Considerations and Privacy Considerations are short, but they seem to reasonably refer to already-published documents. Following are nits I noticed. Abstract "a number of new iCalendar properties and components" -> "a new iCalendar component and a number of properties" Maybe stike "iCalendar" Sec 1, STRUCTURED-DATA. In my opinion the confirmation code would be the most useful new info :) Sec 1, SOURCE Is it redefined or extended? Sec 2, para 2. "In a break with this 'tradition' ..." --> "Breaking with this practice, ..." Sec 3, "When a calendar client receives a calendar component" Should the second calendar be CALENDAR? Should the first be "iCalendar"? Sec 3.1.1, uppercase "vcard"? Sec 3.1.2.1 "non of which" --> "none of which" Sec 4 Perhaps add a sentence saying where this syntax is defined. Is this the complete iCalendar spec or is it just changing a few things? Sec 5.1, etc "as laid down in" Is kind of informal wording. Sec 6, the notation has "value=URI" but the example has "URL" (Sec 7.3, etc., uses URI in both parts) Sec 10, "applications using" Is "acting on" better?
