Telechat Review of draft-ietf-jmap-contacts-09
review-ietf-jmap-contacts-09-artart-telechat-bray-2024-05-18-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-jmap-contacts |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 10) | |
| Type | Telechat Review | |
| Team | ART Area Review Team (artart) | |
| Deadline | 2024-05-28 | |
| Requested | 2024-05-16 | |
| Authors | Neil Jenkins | |
| I-D last updated | 2024-12-18 (Latest revision 2024-06-06) | |
| Completed reviews |
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -06
by Shivan Kaul Sahib
(diff)
Artart Telechat review of -09 by Tim Bray (diff) Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -06 by Linda Dunbar (diff) Artart IETF Last Call review of -06 by Tim Bray (diff) Genart IETF Last Call review of -06 by Meral Shirazipour (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Tim Bray |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Telechat review on draft-ietf-jmap-contacts by ART Area Review Team Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/art/cM1tWDlTOXsPUjt03hR22b0vXB4 | |
| Reviewed revision | 09 (document currently at 10) | |
| Result | Ready w/issues | |
| Completed | 2024-05-18 |
review-ietf-jmap-contacts-09-artart-telechat-bray-2024-05-18-00
Thanks for adding the Internationalization Considerations section, which
addresses the concern in my previous review that this issue needed more work.
I have small issues:
1. There is a reference to "control characters" without any citation, and the
definition is not as obvious as one might think. A good reference is [UNICODE]
section 23.1, which may be summarized as "65 code points in the ranges
U+0000-U+001F ("C0 Controls") and U+0080-U+009F (“C1 Controls”), plus U+007F,
"DEL" 2. This section might benefit from a reference to RFC9413, which has a
thorough discussion of dealing with input data that is invalid for some reason.
3. There are 3 options when receiving a message with invalid characters: delete
them, replace them (Unicode provides U+FFFD for this purpose), or reject the
message. The draft mentions two of these but not the replacement option. Is it
never appropriate in the JMAP context?