[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [VCARDDAV] Comments on draft-ietf-vcarddav-vcardrev-09 (corrected)
sly at gamertheory.net wrote, on 2009-10-20 23:08:
> Section 6.2.2 N -- Would "Family Name" (which is the terminology used in
> section 6.7.5 SORT-STRING) be better than "Surname" for the first value
> of the structure text field (or should it mention both, like "Surname
> (also known as Family Name)"?
Since this is inspired from X.520 where it is known as "surname", I added "(also
known as family name)".
> Section 6.4.4 LANG -- The third example should probably be ":fr" not
> "=fr".
Good catch!
> Section 6.5.1 TZ -- Example should be representative of the expected
> format, e.g.
>
> TZ:Raleigh/North America
> TZ:-0500
> ;Note: utc-offset format is not recommended.
Yes, that's better. Changed.
> Section 6.7.5 SORT-STRING -- is specified as "family name or given
> name", but without any way to distinguish which (family or given) the
> sort-string refers to!
>
> The examples (as noted) are for family name sorting only, but this is
> not indicated anywhere in the vCard.
>
> Perhaps the SORT-STRING property should be structure the same as the N
> property, i.e. a structured field with "family name;given name".
I agree. I changed the text to what you propose.
> e.g. In the following (made-up) example, the person's family name is "de
> Mann", but is sorted as "Mann", whilst their first given name is
> "Henry", but they are sorted as "James".
>
> FN:H. James de Mann
> N:de Mann;Henry, James
> SORT-STRING:Mann;James
Very good example! Thanks!
> If sorted by given name the results would be:
>
> Jack Smith
> H. James de Mann
> Janice Chung
>
> If sorted by family name the results would be:
>
> Simon Mafou
> H. James de Mann
> Richard Martin
It's a good idea to include this as an example. I did the same with the examples
in the text.
> All the examples work fine, as the parts of SORT-NAME would be optional
> (like they are with N), so a single text value simply replaces the
> family name (which is the normal value that needs alternate sorting).
Actually the fields are not optional in N. The examples have to be fixed.
> Also, note the second example appears to have an "additional" name field
> in the N property (the N field now only has 4 fields) -- unless the
> "Robert" is supposed to be an Honorific Prefix?
Right. Fixed.
Thanks for your comments,
Simon
--
DNS64 open-source --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server --> http://numb.viagenie.ca
vCard 4.0 --> http://www.vcarddav.org