Sandy, Please let me know if there is anything else needed from the authors (Chris and me). We are done with our changes/comments. You should have the revised XML file that I sent in the previous email.
Thanks, Yeshwant Yeshwant Muthusamy, Ph.D. Owner and Principal Yeshvik Solutions, LLC www.yeshvik.com +1 469-854-9836 yeshw...@yeshvik.com On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 3:17 PM Yeshwant Muthusamy <yeshw...@yeshvik.com> wrote: > Sandy, Others, > > Attached please find the XML source with the authors' comments and > changes, in response to the comments marked [rfced] by the RFC Editors. > > FWIW, we've also included the revised output files (.txt and .html), > generated using xml2rfc -v3, reflecting all the changes made (with the > exception of the deleting the Terminology section - we have left that for > the Editors). > > Authors' responses/comments/notes are clearly marked within the comment > sections in the attached XML document. Examples: [AUTHORS' RESPONSE], > [AUTHORS' NOTE], etc. > > Please let me know if something is unclear or if we have missed something. > > Thanks for your patience. > > Yeshwant > > > > Yeshwant Muthusamy, Ph.D. > Owner and Principal > Yeshvik Solutions, LLC > www.yeshvik.com > +1 469-854-9836 > yeshw...@yeshvik.com > > > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 1:03 PM Sandy Ginoza <sgin...@staff.rfc-editor.org> > wrote: > >> Hi Yeshwant, >> >> We will wait to hear from you and Chris - thank you for the update. >> >> Thank you, >> RFC Editor/sg >> >> > On Jan 10, 2025, at 10:55 AM, Yeshwant Muthusamy <yeshw...@yeshvik.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > Sandy, >> > >> > I completed my changes/revisions based on the Editors' comments. I have >> sent them to my co-author, Chris Ullrich, for his review and additions, if >> any (as we are not in the same location). I hope to hear back from Chris >> today. We will get back to you as soon as possible. >> > >> > Thanks for your patience. >> > >> > Yeshwant >> > >> > >> > >> > Yeshwant Muthusamy, Ph.D. >> > Owner and Principal >> > Yeshvik Solutions, LLC >> > www.yeshvik.com >> > +1 469-854-9836 >> > yeshw...@yeshvik.com >> > >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 12:51 PM Sandy Ginoza < >> sgin...@staff.rfc-editor.org> wrote: >> > Authors, >> > >> > We do not believe we have heard from you regarding the questions >> below. Please let us know how we may resolve the items listed below. >> > >> > Thank you, >> > RFC Editor/sg >> > >> > > On Dec 23, 2024, at 11:12 PM, rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org wrote: >> > > >> > > Authors, >> > > >> > > While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as >> necessary) >> > > the following questions, which are also in the XML file. >> > > >> > > 1) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that appear >> in >> > > the title) for use on https://www.rfc-editor.org/search. --> >> > > >> > > >> > > 2) <!-- [rfced] We do believe the capitalized keywords are used in >> the RFC. >> > > Please review and let us know if any of the capitalized keywords >> should be >> > > used. Otherwise, we will remove the Terminology section and related >> > > references. >> > > >> > > Original: >> > > 1.1. Terminology >> > > >> > > The keywords MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, >> > > SHOULD,SHOULD NOT, RECOMMENDED, NOT RECOMMENDED, MAY, and OPTIONAL >> in >> > > this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] >> > > [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown >> > > here. >> > > >> > > --> >> > > >> > > >> > > 3) <!-- [rfced] Would you like to include references for the sales >> data >> > > listed? >> > > >> > > Original: >> > > * iPhone (206+ million units sold in 2020): native support for >> > > haptic encoded data >> > > >> > > * Android (1.38+ billion units sold in 2020): API support of haptic >> > > buffers >> > > >> > > * W3C (HTML vibration API [W3C-Vibration]): Optionally supported in >> > > mobile web browsers. W3C has also defined vibration extensions >> > > for gamepads [W3C-Gamepad] >> > > >> > > * Game consoles (39+ million units sold in 2019): MS Xbox, Sony >> > > PlayStation, Nintendo Switch, etc. >> > > >> > > * XR devices (9+ million units sold in 2019): OpenXR haptic API >> > > --> >> > > >> > > >> > > 4) <!-- [rfced] May we expand CE as Customer Edge? >> > > >> > > Original: >> > > Since they represent the majority of CE devices, a strong >> > > case can be made for 'haptics' as a top-level media type. >> > > --> >> > > >> > > >> > > 5) <!-- [rfced] The text indicates the subtypes have not been >> > > registered by IANA, but ivs is being registered by this document. >> Please >> > > consider whether updates are needed. Is it correct that ivs is the >> only >> > > type mentioned in Section 2.5 being registered at this time? >> > > Note: likely different, but we see ogg has been registered as an >> > > application subtype (see >> https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/ogg). >> > > >> > > Original: >> > > While these subtypes have *not* been registered with IANA or >> > > standardized (yet), the prevalence of these haptic data formats in a >> > > large number of devices around the world, pre-dating the >> > > standardization of haptic tracks in ISOBMFF, provides a compelling >> > > argument for 'haptics' to be designated as a top-level media type: >> > > >> > > Perhaps remove mention of "not been registered with IANA? >> > > While these subtypes have *not* been standardized (yet), >> > > the prevalence of these haptic data formats in a >> > > large number of devices around the world, pre-dating the >> > > standardization of haptic tracks in ISOBMFF, provides a compelling >> > > argument for 'haptics' to be designated as a top-level media type: >> > > --> >> > > >> > > >> > > 6) <!-- [rfced] hmpg and hjif are being registered by this document. >> > > Please consider how this text can be updated for accuracy. >> > > >> > > Original: >> > > These >> > > codes are not registered yet, but the plan is indeed to standardize >> > > these haptic coding formats in the near future. Once standardized, >> > > these types should also be registered as subtypes of the 'haptics' >> > > top-level media type: >> > > --> >> > > >> > > >> > > 7) <!-- [rfced] For ease of the reader, we have updated "FourCC >> codes" as >> > > "FourCCs (four-character codes)". Alternatively, may we replace >> "FourCC" >> > > with "four-character codes", because this is the only place FourCC is >> used? >> > > Please review. >> > > >> > > Original: >> > > The MPEG ISOBMFF proposal included an informative annex of known >> > > haptic coding formats with proposed FourCC codes for them. >> > > >> > > Current: >> > > The MPEG ISOBMFF proposal included an informative annex of known >> > > haptic coding formats with proposed FourCCs (four-character codes) >> > > for them. >> > > --> >> > > >> > > >> > > 8) <!-- [rfced] Should "URLL" be "URLLC"? If correct, may we expand >> URLLC >> > > as "Ultra-Reliable Low-Latency Communication (URLLC)"? If not, >> please >> > > indicate how URLL should be expanded. >> > > >> > > Original: >> > > * IEEE P1918.1.1 vibrotactile coding standard [IEEE-P191811] being >> > > developed under the IEEE Tactile Internet initiative as part of >> > > the 5G URLL profile. >> > > --> >> > > >> > > >> > > 9) <!-- [rfced] [ISOBMFF-IS] This reference is the most current >> > > version of this standard, but there is a note on this version that >> states >> > > "Expected to be replaced by ISO/IEC DIS 14496-12.2 within the coming >> > > months." Please let us know if publication of this document should >> be >> > > delayed until ISO/IEC DIS 14496-12.2 is formally published >> > > (see https://www.iso.org/standard/85596.html). >> > > >> > > Original: >> > > [ISOBMFF-IS] >> > > "ISO/IEC 14496-12 (7th Edition) Information technology >> — >> > > Coding of audio-visual objects — Part 12: ISO base >> media >> > > file format", <https://www.iso.org/standard/83102.html>. >> > > --> >> > > >> > > >> > > 10) <!-- [rfced] [IEEE-P191811] The original URL redirected to the >> > > search page for IEEE Standards: https://standards.ieee.org/standard/. >> >> > > We have updated the reference as described on >> > > https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10555007. The status is marked >> as >> > > "Inactive - Draft". Please review and let us know if any updates are >> > > needed. >> > > >> > > [IEEE-P191811] >> > > "P1918.1.1 - Haptic Codecs for the Tactile Internet", >> > > <https://standards.ieee.org/project/1918_1_1.html>. >> > > --> >> > > >> > > >> > > 11) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "Inclusive Language" portion of >> the >> > > online Style Guide < >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/#inclusive_language> >> > > and let us know if any changes are needed. Updates of this nature >> > > typically result in more precise language, which is helpful for >> readers. >> > > >> > > For example, please consider whether the following should be updated: >> > > native >> > > >> > > Note that native can be ambiguous because it is subjective. Perhaps >> "built-in" would work? >> > > --> >> > > >> > > >> > > Thank you. >> > > >> > > RFC Editor >> > > >> > > >> > > On Dec 23, 2024, at 11:03 PM, rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org wrote: >> > > >> > > *****IMPORTANT***** >> > > >> > > Updated 2024/12/23 >> > > >> > > RFC Author(s): >> > > -------------- >> > > >> > > Instructions for Completing AUTH48 >> > > >> > > Your document has now entered AUTH48. Once it has been reviewed and >> > > approved by you and all coauthors, it will be published as an RFC. >> > > If an author is no longer available, there are several remedies >> > > available as listed in the FAQ (https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/). >> > > >> > > You and you coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties >> > > (e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before providing >> > > your approval. >> > > >> > > Planning your review >> > > --------------------- >> > > >> > > Please review the following aspects of your document: >> > > >> > > * RFC Editor questions >> > > >> > > Please review and resolve any questions raised by the RFC Editor >> > > that have been included in the XML file as comments marked as >> > > follows: >> > > >> > > <!-- [rfced] ... --> >> > > >> > > These questions will also be sent in a subsequent email. >> > > >> > > * Changes submitted by coauthors >> > > >> > > Please ensure that you review any changes submitted by your >> > > coauthors. We assume that if you do not speak up that you >> > > agree to changes submitted by your coauthors. >> > > >> > > * Content >> > > >> > > Please review the full content of the document, as this cannot >> > > change once the RFC is published. Please pay particular attention >> to: >> > > - IANA considerations updates (if applicable) >> > > - contact information >> > > - references >> > > >> > > * Copyright notices and legends >> > > >> > > Please review the copyright notice and legends as defined in >> > > RFC 5378 and the Trust Legal Provisions >> > > (TLP – https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). >> > > >> > > * Semantic markup >> > > >> > > Please review the markup in the XML file to ensure that elements >> of >> > > content are correctly tagged. For example, ensure that >> <sourcecode> >> > > and <artwork> are set correctly. See details at >> > > <https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary>. >> > > >> > > * Formatted output >> > > >> > > Please review the PDF, HTML, and TXT files to ensure that the >> > > formatted output, as generated from the markup in the XML file, is >> > > reasonable. Please note that the TXT will have formatting >> > > limitations compared to the PDF and HTML. >> > > >> > > >> > > Submitting changes >> > > ------------------ >> > > >> > > To submit changes, please reply to this email using ‘REPLY ALL’ as >> all >> > > the parties CCed on this message need to see your changes. The >> parties >> > > include: >> > > >> > > * your coauthors >> > > >> > > * rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org (the RPC team) >> > > >> > > * other document participants, depending on the stream (e.g., >> > > IETF Stream participants are your working group chairs, the >> > > responsible ADs, and the document shepherd). >> > > >> > > * auth48archive@rfc-editor.org, which is a new archival mailing >> list >> > > to preserve AUTH48 conversations; it is not an active discussion >> > > list: >> > > >> > > * More info: >> > > >> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc >> > > >> > > * The archive itself: >> > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/ >> > > >> > > * Note: If only absolutely necessary, you may temporarily opt >> out >> > > of the archiving of messages (e.g., to discuss a sensitive >> matter). >> > > If needed, please add a note at the top of the message that >> you >> > > have dropped the address. When the discussion is concluded, >> > > auth48archive@rfc-editor.org will be re-added to the CC list >> and >> > > its addition will be noted at the top of the message. >> > > >> > > You may submit your changes in one of two ways: >> > > >> > > An update to the provided XML file >> > > — OR — >> > > An explicit list of changes in this format >> > > >> > > Section # (or indicate Global) >> > > >> > > OLD: >> > > old text >> > > >> > > NEW: >> > > new text >> > > >> > > You do not need to reply with both an updated XML file and an >> explicit >> > > list of changes, as either form is sufficient. >> > > >> > > We will ask a stream manager to review and approve any changes that >> seem >> > > beyond editorial in nature, e.g., addition of new text, deletion of >> text, >> > > and technical changes. Information about stream managers can be >> found in >> > > the FAQ. Editorial changes do not require approval from a stream >> manager. >> > > >> > > >> > > Approving for publication >> > > -------------------------- >> > > >> > > To approve your RFC for publication, please reply to this email >> stating >> > > that you approve this RFC for publication. Please use ‘REPLY ALL’, >> > > as all the parties CCed on this message need to see your approval. >> > > >> > > >> > > Files >> > > ----- >> > > >> > > The files are available here: >> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9695.xml >> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9695.html >> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9695.pdf >> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9695.txt >> > > >> > > Diff file of the text: >> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9695-diff.html >> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9695-rfcdiff.html (side by >> side) >> > > >> > > Diff of the XML: >> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9695-xmldiff1.html >> > > >> > > >> > > Tracking progress >> > > ----------------- >> > > >> > > The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here: >> > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9695 >> > > >> > > Please let us know if you have any questions. >> > > >> > > Thank you for your cooperation, >> > > >> > > RFC Editor >> > > >> > > -------------------------------------- >> > > RFC9695 (draft-ietf-mediaman-haptics-05) >> > > >> > > Title : The 'haptics' Top-level Media Type >> > > Author(s) : Y. Muthusamy, C. Ullrich >> > > WG Chair(s) : Harald T. Alvestrand >> > > Area Director(s) : Murray Kucherawy, Orie Steele >> > > >> > > >> > >> >>
-- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
