Hi Pete, thank you for this review. I have collected my proposed changes based on these and other comments in https://github.com/cbor-wg/cbor-magic-number/pull/21 under the commit https://github.com/cbor-wg/cbor-magic-number/pull/21/commits/e476afb > Nits/editorial comments: > > Section 1 could use a solid edit. Here are some editorial issues that stuck out > to me (as always, just suggested changes): > > Paragraph 3 (this one is a content problem rather than strictly nits, but also > isn't a technical issue with the document): > > OLD > > For instance, in classical MacOS, a > resource fork was maintained that includes media type ("MIME type") > information and therefore ideally never needs to know anything about > the file. > > NEW > > For instance, in classical MacOS, a > resource fork was maintained separately from the file data that > included file type information and therefore the OS ideally never > needed to know anything about the file data contents to determine the > media type. Thanks! (Slightly modified.) > No "But" is required at the beginning of paragraph 4. > > Paragraph 5: Change "file" to "file contents". (For what it's worth, I disagree > with the paragraph, in that I think it's actually worse to keep the media type > information in the data portion of the file, but I don't have a problem with > you disagreeing with that in the introduction.) > > Paragraph 8: Change the colon to a semicolon. > > Paragraph 9: Replace "A third" with "An additional". > > Swap paragraphs 9 & 10. > > Paragraphs 13 & 14 seem confusing, if not contradictory. I have merged them and removed the seeming contradiction. > > Move paragraph 14 up after paragraph 8. > > The last paragraph repeats the information in the 9th paragraph. Actually, not really, as the last paragraph is about identified content-formats only. I have merged the paragraph with 10 (was 9). > Section 2.1, last paragraph: Change "has already been allocated" to "is > described". I’m not sure the registry “describes” anything; I have changed this to “has pro-actively been allocated”. > Appendix C, last paragraph before C.1: This is a repeat of the last paragraph > of section 2.3. I don't think it's necessary to repeat. I think it is worth saying that this is the same as with Labeled CBOR Sequence, so I just shortened the text a bit. Grüße, Carsten -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
