[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IESG Review of draft-ietf-sieve-vacation

2006-02-06 15:49:37

On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 07:46:39PM -0500, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
Hi Scott,

--On January 19, 2006 1:46:00 PM -0500 Scott Hollenbeck 
<sah(_at_)428cobrajet(_dot_)net> wrote:

Thanks for the note, Ned.  It leads me to two more specific questions:

Does the document need to describe the issues noted below in an
Internationalization Considerations section?  It might make sense.

My feeling is that what Ned described would be better off being put in the 
base spec revision rather than vacation, since its is applicable to base 
spec actions and other extensions too. i.e. we don't need to add this 
directly to vacation itself.

What do others on the list think?

I would have agreed with you, but the text in the latest (-06) draft
looks good too.  The only typo I noted:


   > The Sieve language itself allows a vacation response to selected
   > based on the content of the original message.

needs a "be" -- "to be selected" (not "to selected")


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>