canmove, Confirmed users
2,887
edits
(→draft 13 section by section review: XML property still a bad idea.) |
(finally cleaned up summary conclusion edits on draft 13 (over past couple of weeks)) |
||
| Line 337: | Line 337: | ||
I suggest some wording and examples clarifying what the purpose may be for multiple FNs, e.g. multiple ways of displaying a name (perhaps some with additional names, some without), or multiple ways (character sets? languages?) to write a name (e.g. a Japanese name may be written with Kanji or transliterated Hiragana). | I suggest some wording and examples clarifying what the purpose may be for multiple FNs, e.g. multiple ways of displaying a name (perhaps some with additional names, some without), or multiple ways (character sets? languages?) to write a name (e.g. a Japanese name may be written with Kanji or transliterated Hiragana). | ||
ISSUE STILL EXISTS IN DRAFT 15 | |||
=== section 6.2.2. N === | === section 6.2.2. N === | ||
| Line 351: | Line 352: | ||
* Restore the "additional name" structural component that was in vCard3 for better schematic compatibility. | * Restore the "additional name" structural component that was in vCard3 for better schematic compatibility. | ||
* Am ok with multiple Given Names as that does reflect common practice. | * Am ok with multiple Given Names as that does reflect common practice. | ||
THIS SECTION HAS ACCEPTED AND RESOLVED ALL ISSUES AS OF DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.2.3. NICKNAME === | === section 6.2.3. NICKNAME === | ||
| Line 357: | Line 360: | ||
Use "belonging to the object the vCard represents" instead. | Use "belonging to the object the vCard represents" instead. | ||
THIS SECTION HAS ACCEPTED AND RESOLVED ALL ISSUES AS OF DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.2.4. PHOTO === | === section 6.2.4. PHOTO === | ||
| Line 368: | Line 373: | ||
<nowiki>data:[<MIME-type>][;charset=<encoding>][;base64],<data></nowiki> | <nowiki>data:[<MIME-type>][;charset=<encoding>][;base64],<data></nowiki> | ||
THIS SECTION HAS ACCEPTED AND RESOLVED ALL ISSUES AS OF DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.2.5. BDAY === | === section 6.2.5. BDAY === | ||
| Line 374: | Line 381: | ||
The expansion of permitting month-day only or year only are both very good. Would also suggest permitting year-month as well, e.g. 1996-04 | The expansion of permitting month-day only or year only are both very good. Would also suggest permitting year-month as well, e.g. 1996-04 | ||
ISSUE STILL EXISTS IN DRAFT 15 | |||
=== section 6.2.6. DDAY === | === section 6.2.6. DDAY === | ||
| Line 406: | Line 414: | ||
I would also be ok postponing this property to a "genealogy" extension. | I would also be ok postponing this property to a "genealogy" extension. | ||
PRIMARY ISSUE RESOLVED, PROPERTY DROPPED AS OF DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.2.7. BIRTH === | === section 6.2.7. BIRTH === | ||
| Line 417: | Line 427: | ||
Recommendation: drop from vCard4. | Recommendation: drop from vCard4. | ||
PRIMARY ISSUE RESOLVED, PROPERTY DROPPED AS OF DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.2.8. DEATH === | === section 6.2.8. DEATH === | ||
| Line 428: | Line 440: | ||
Recommendation: drop from vCard4. | Recommendation: drop from vCard4. | ||
PRIMARY ISSUE RESOLVED, PROPERTY DROPPED AS OF DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.2.9. ANNIVERSARY === | === section 6.2.9. ANNIVERSARY === | ||
| Line 435: | Line 449: | ||
Should allow same date-and-or-time data type as BDAY, including year-only, month-day, year-month etc. | Should allow same date-and-or-time data type as BDAY, including year-only, month-day, year-month etc. | ||
ISSUE STILL EXISTS IN DRAFT 15 | |||
=== section 6.2.10. SEX === | === section 6.2.10. SEX === | ||
| Line 507: | Line 523: | ||
The examples of "Fellow" and "Bird" are taken from the actual [http://microformats.org/wiki/gender-examples user interface of Digg], and see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex#Intersex_identity Wikipedia for intersex]. | The examples of "Fellow" and "Bird" are taken from the actual [http://microformats.org/wiki/gender-examples user interface of Digg], and see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex#Intersex_identity Wikipedia for intersex]. | ||
ISSUE PARTIALLY RESOLVED AS OF DRAFT 15. | |||
STILL NEED COMPLETE TWO PART GENDER PROPERTY. | |||
=== section 6.3. Delivery Addressing Properties === | === section 6.3. Delivery Addressing Properties === | ||
| Line 525: | Line 545: | ||
* deprecate extended address (keep it in the structure, but suggest an empty string) | * deprecate extended address (keep it in the structure, but suggest an empty string) | ||
* encourage multiline (lines delimited with the COMMA character as the draft suggests) in the "street address" subproperty, with the first line being the actual street address with number and name of street, or if there is none (e.g. in the case of a PO BOX only address), simply include the replacement that you would on a mailing label, corresponding to the "address line 1" field that we see on so many forms. | * encourage multiline (lines delimited with the COMMA character as the draft suggests) in the "street address" subproperty, with the first line being the actual street address with number and name of street, or if there is none (e.g. in the case of a PO BOX only address), simply include the replacement that you would on a mailing label, corresponding to the "address line 1" field that we see on so many forms. | ||
THIS SECTION HAS ACCEPTED AND HAS SUFFICIENTLY RESOLVED THESE ISSUES AS OF DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.3.2. LABEL === | === section 6.3.2. LABEL === | ||
| Line 530: | Line 552: | ||
Seems unchanged from vCard3. Better to deprecate the LABEL property and add a LABEL parameter to the ADR property. | Seems unchanged from vCard3. Better to deprecate the LABEL property and add a LABEL parameter to the ADR property. | ||
PRIMARY ISSUE RESOLVED, PROPERTY DROPPED AS OF DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.4. Communications Properties === | === section 6.4. Communications Properties === | ||
| Line 535: | Line 559: | ||
Intro sentence needs to be reworded - total awkward run-on. | Intro sentence needs to be reworded - total awkward run-on. | ||
THIS SECTION HAS ACCEPTED AND RESOLVED ALL ISSUES AS OF DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.4.1. TEL === | === section 6.4.1. TEL === | ||
| Line 546: | Line 572: | ||
The notion of PREF is badly outdated and needs to be rethought *across* different types of communications, not just among instances of a specific type of communication (e.g. what is preferred: phone vs email, not just which phone number). | The notion of PREF is badly outdated and needs to be rethought *across* different types of communications, not just among instances of a specific type of communication (e.g. what is preferred: phone vs email, not just which phone number). | ||
ALL ISSUES BUT PREF RESOLVED AS OF DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.4.2. EMAIL === | === section 6.4.2. EMAIL === | ||
| Line 551: | Line 579: | ||
Same comment about PREF. Good to see the useless TYPE param dropped. | Same comment about PREF. Good to see the useless TYPE param dropped. | ||
PREF ISSUE REMAINS IN DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.4.3. IMPP === | === section 6.4.3. IMPP === | ||
| Line 556: | Line 586: | ||
Seems like a reasonable addition, and good example of an extension being tried for a new feature before inclusion in the core. A lesson to be applied to the genealogy properties that have been proposed. | Seems like a reasonable addition, and good example of an extension being tried for a new feature before inclusion in the core. A lesson to be applied to the genealogy properties that have been proposed. | ||
ALL STATED ISSUES RESOLVED BUT PREF ISSUE REMAINS IN DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.4.4. LANG === | === section 6.4.4. LANG === | ||
| Line 566: | Line 598: | ||
The term "lang" is already a commonly used HTML attribute that appears to be similar in syntax (e.g. takes a single language-tag value) but is quite different in meaning, in that it indicates the language of the text being marked up, rather than a preference for communication. | The term "lang" is already a commonly used HTML attribute that appears to be similar in syntax (e.g. takes a single language-tag value) but is quite different in meaning, in that it indicates the language of the text being marked up, rather than a preference for communication. | ||
ISSUE STILL EXISTS IN DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.5. Geographical Properties === | === section 6.5. Geographical Properties === | ||
| Line 581: | Line 614: | ||
Cardinality should be (0-1) - how can a vCard object be in multiple time zones? | Cardinality should be (0-1) - how can a vCard object be in multiple time zones? | ||
ISSUES STILL EXIST IN DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.5.2. GEO === | === section 6.5.2. GEO === | ||
| Line 589: | Line 624: | ||
Cardinality should be (0-1) - how can a vCard object be in multiple locations? | Cardinality should be (0-1) - how can a vCard object be in multiple locations? | ||
ISSUE STILL EXISTS IN DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.6. Organizational Properties === | === section 6.6. Organizational Properties === | ||
| Line 618: | Line 653: | ||
Recommend also providing an example with both LOGO and PHOTO that clearly demonstrates the proper/intended use of each. | Recommend also providing an example with both LOGO and PHOTO that clearly demonstrates the proper/intended use of each. | ||
ISSUES STILL EXIST IN DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.6.4. ORG === | === section 6.6.4. ORG === | ||
| Line 630: | Line 667: | ||
Recommend drop this property. | Recommend drop this property. | ||
ISSUE STILL EXISTS IN DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.6.6. RELATED === | === section 6.6.6. RELATED === | ||
| Line 643: | Line 682: | ||
http://microformats.org/wiki/xfn-brainstorming | http://microformats.org/wiki/xfn-brainstorming | ||
ISSUES MOSTLY RESOLVED IN DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.7. Explanatory Properties === | === section 6.7. Explanatory Properties === | ||
| Line 649: | Line 690: | ||
Organizationally I'm not sure this makes much sense. Most of these apply to the vCard object as a whole and are perhaps identity related and could be grouped into section 6.2. | Organizationally I'm not sure this makes much sense. Most of these apply to the vCard object as a whole and are perhaps identity related and could be grouped into section 6.2. | ||
ISSUE STILL EXISTS IN DRAFT 15 BUT IS LARGELY EDITORIAL. | |||
=== section 6.7.1. CATEGORIES === | === section 6.7.1. CATEGORIES === | ||
| Line 656: | Line 699: | ||
Suggestion: explicitly allow URIs as text values to represent specifically scoped tags, with the last path segment of the URI representing the "keyword" of the tag, as specified by the rel-tag specification http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-tag | Suggestion: explicitly allow URIs as text values to represent specifically scoped tags, with the last path segment of the URI representing the "keyword" of the tag, as specified by the rel-tag specification http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-tag | ||
ISSUE STILL EXISTS IN DRAFT 15 BUT IS ACCEPTABLE TO PUNT. | |||
There was some mailing list traffic on this that we can look up and consider following up to. | |||
Will raise again noting the similarity to TEL's addition of URI values. | |||
=== section 6.7.2. NOTE === | === section 6.7.2. NOTE === | ||
| Line 671: | Line 720: | ||
Would be nice to allow whole dates as well (without time). | Would be nice to allow whole dates as well (without time). | ||
ISSUE STILL EXISTS IN DRAFT 15 BUT IS ACCEPTABLE TO PUNT. | |||
In practice this property is not used much by authors (or rather, we have little or any documented evidence of such), thus we can delay extending it until we have supporting evidence. | |||
=== section 6.7.5. SOUND === | === section 6.7.5. SOUND === | ||
| Line 686: | Line 739: | ||
Lacking an example with a use-case, this property should be dropped. | Lacking an example with a use-case, this property should be dropped. | ||
This was later clarified as being part of how versioning of property values with PIDs works. | |||
=== section 6.7.8. URL === | === section 6.7.8. URL === | ||
| Line 708: | Line 763: | ||
The SORT-AS parameter MAY be applied to this property. | The SORT-AS parameter MAY be applied to this property. | ||
ISSUE STILL EXISTS IN DRAFT 15 BUT IS ACCEPTABLE TO PUNT. | |||
=== section 6.7.9. VERSION === | === section 6.7.9. VERSION === | ||
| Line 725: | Line 782: | ||
I don't think it is clear how to use it, and it should be dropped from vCard4 (or at least deprecated/ignored). | I don't think it is clear how to use it, and it should be dropped from vCard4 (or at least deprecated/ignored). | ||
ISSUE HAS BEEN ACCEPTED AND RESOLVED AS OF DRAFT 15 - PROPERTY DROPPED. | |||
=== section 6.8.2. KEY === | === section 6.8.2. KEY === | ||
| Line 732: | Line 791: | ||
It would be great if there were an example with PGP. | It would be great if there were an example with PGP. | ||
ISSUE ACCEPTED AND RESOLVED IN DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 6.9. Calendar Properties === | === section 6.9. Calendar Properties === | ||
| Line 755: | Line 816: | ||
=== section 9. Security Considerations === | === section 9. Security Considerations === | ||
Seems fine. If we deprecate the CLASS property, the text referring to Section 6.8.1. should be amended. | Seems fine. If we deprecate the CLASS property, the text referring to Section 6.8.1. should be amended. | ||
ISSUE ACCEPTED AND RESOLVED IN DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 10. IANA Considerations === | === section 10. IANA Considerations === | ||
| Line 766: | Line 829: | ||
10.3.4. Values Registries will have to be updated if/when KIND and CLASS are dropped/deprecated. | 10.3.4. Values Registries will have to be updated if/when KIND and CLASS are dropped/deprecated. | ||
ISSUES ACCEPTED AND RESOLVED IN DRAFT 15. | |||
=== section 11. Acknowledgements === | === section 11. Acknowledgements === | ||