-----Original Message-----
From: Alexey Melnikov [mailto:alexey(_dot_)melnikov(_at_)isode(_dot_)com]
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 9:41 AM
To: Scott Hollenbeck
Cc: ietf-mta-filters(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: AD evaluation comments: draft-ietf-sieve-variables
Scott Hollenbeck wrote:
Just a small nit and a question:
The Abstract should be more clear about the focus of the
document. It
describes "This extension", but it doesn't explain what's
being extended.
The Abstract currently says:
In advanced filtering rule sets, it is useful to keep state or
configuration details across rules. This extension changes the
interpretation of strings, adds an action to store data in
variables,
and supplies a new test so that the value of a string can be
examined.
How about the following:
In advanced filtering rule sets, it is useful to keep state or
configuration details across rules. This document describes a
SIEVE (RFC XXXX) extension that changes the
interpretation of strings, adds an action to store data
in variables,
and supplies a new test so that the value of a string can be
examined.
Looks good to me.
RFC 2234 has been obsoleted. Can the reference to 2234 be
updated to refer
to 2234bis instead?
Absolutely. But I personally would prefer if the document is
not delayed
on this reference. In practice, this might not be an issue,
as there is
at least one normative reference (base Sieve document) that
would have
to be satisfied first.
2234bis is already in the RFC Editor queue. This doc will be way behind it,
and I can expedite processing of 2234bis if need be.
-Scott-