On 17 Dec 2024, at 18:34, Michael Welzl wrote:
Dear all,
I am now finished with the capitalization task for the entire cluster.
I’m attaching “before” and “after” versions of the XML files
(filenames “-OLD.xml” and “-NEW.xml”).
I would like to say that I approve publication (as Megan wrote, please
see here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/C508 - everyone needs to
approve everything so this can go ahead!), but this update was so big
and I think it’s important to get this right due to our special use
of capitals to indicate the abstract element offered to the
application, versus small letters to indicate elements related to the
transport protocols below.
So, I would like to give it 1-2 days, in the hope that some of my
co-authors here take a look at the diffs and either make corrections
or say that they approve. Let’s get a few approvals from you others,
and then let’s quickly all approve, please. I believe that this is
the very last thing we have to do here!
TO MY CLUSTER CO-AUTHORS:
The best way to look at these files is to upload them here:
https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff
I looked at 9621 and 9622. I won’t say I check to see if you missed
anything, but the changes that were made look good to me, with one
exception:
RFC 9621 Section 4.1.4, first paragraph (“Initiate”) ends with
“occurs in response to the calling Initiate” (changed from “…to
the Initiate call”) but should perhaps say “…in response to
calling Initiate”?
Also, I think it’s fair to say that, at this point, *each and every
one of you* owes me a beer :-)))
Possibly more than one – this was a ton of work!
Cheers,
Colin
--
auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org
To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
