Reviewer: Qin Wu Review result: Has Nits This document registers the application/yaml media type and the +yaml structured syntax suffix on the IANA Media Types registry. In addition, this documents provides security considerations and interoperability considerations related to YMAL and JSON. I believe this document is well written and ready for publication, however I do have a few comments as follows: Major issues: No Minor issues: 1. Section 2 For Media Type registration in section 2, I am not clear whether Macintosh file type code and Windows Clipboard Name should be mentioned as additional information? 2. Section 2.2 For The +yaml Structured Syntax Suffix in section 2.2, how many contacts do we allowed? My impression, in most case, the single contact is preferred, wrong? 3.Section 3.1 said: “ While this document is based on a given YAML version [YAML], the media type registration does not imply a specific version. This allows content negotiation of version-independent YAML resources. Implementers concerned about features related to a specific YAML version can specify it in YAML documents using the %YAML directive (see Section 6.8.1 of [YAML]). ” It looks these two paragraphs contradict to each other, if we see features related to a specific YAML version as some kind of YAML resource, should we also allow content negotiation of version specific YAML resources? Correct me if I am wrong? 4. Section 3.2 said: “ When receiving a multi-document stream, an application that only expects one-document streams, ought to signal an error instead of ignoring the extra documents. Current implementations consider different documents in a stream independent, similarly to JSON Text Sequences (see [RFC7464]); elements such as anchors are not guaranteed to be referenceable across different documents. ” I am a little confused here, Is current implementations documented by this draft? Or new implementation related to this draft should consider different document in a stream dependently or can detect whether a single document or multiple documents are carried in a stream? I also suggest we should leave how to signal an error beyond the scope of this document. 5. Section 3.4 figure 3 Not clear whether figure 3 in section 3.4 should be moved to Appendix A. Or some figure in appendix A should be moved to section 3.4, e.g., One interoperability issue， i.e., mapping keys that are not strings is clearly related to appendix A.1 6. Nits s/ when trying to serialize it JSON/ when trying to serialize it in JSON s/ representaion graph/ representation graph s/ can infinite-loop traversing the YAML representation graph/ can fall into infinite-loop traversing the YAML representation graph -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
