[Last-Call] Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-asdf-sdf-18

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Mallory,

thanks for the review!

 

I’ve unwrapped the comments but have made no other edits to them.

 

<start of unwrapped section>

 

Major issues: None.


Minor issues:

 

* 1.1. The definition for "Grouping" is unsatisfying. Its definition relies on

   other terminology that invokes this term, resulting self-referential

   definitions. "Grouping: An sdfThing or sdfObject, i.e., (directly or

   indirectly) a combination of Affordances." What, as well, is the relationship

   to the defined term "Group"?

 

* 1.1. "Affordance" might appear after "Thing". As a general comment, perhaps

   the terminology section requires a sweep to better organise the order of

   definitions for improved and easier comprehension. For example, the order of

   Augmentation Mechanism and Protocol Binding should probably be swapped.

 

* General comment, and 1.1., "object" and "map" are mentioned throughout

   (almost 200+ together) yet the treatment of the relationship of these two

   terms in JSON is rather cavalier. For dispelling confusion, suggest entering

   both as separate terms that clearly indicate they are interchangeable, and

   when they are not.

 

* 4.2. It is unclear how this description relates to Figure 1. Suggest

   invoking the relationship to Figure 1 but entirely reworking Figure 1 as a

   new figure for this section with the example URLs indicated explicitly.

 

 

Nits/editorial comments:

 

* The capitalisation of terms defined in 1.1. appear inconsistently in the

   text.

 

* 1. Suggest Conventions as a separate subsection as 1.2. and to include the

   short paragraph about byte, the one convention expressed already, as well as

   the BCP 14 text.

 

* 2.1. Parentheticals might be minimised overall, but for example:

 

** (The third type of affordance [sic] is Events, which are not described in

   this example.) -- This can just be a sentence.

 

               ** ... how (with the exception of the info group) maps that have... -- The

   parenthetical is both disruptive to the sentence because of where it's placed

   and also indicates important information as an exception, thereby suggesting

   it should be its own sentence.

 

* 2.2.2. para 2 -- Parenthetical can be a sentence.

 

* 2.3.3. penultimate para -- "(one or more)" should not be in parenthensis.

   * et cetera.

 

* 4.5. bullet 2: "The affordance/grouping itself..." since affordance and

   grouping are two separate terms, suggest "The affordance or grouping

   itself..."

 

* 4.7. item 1 para 2: Again, unwise to put a SHOULD NOT in a parenthetical.

 

* Suggest referencing RFC8610 when the use of CDDL is first introduced,

   rather than first in the security considerations and then in the appendix.

 

<end of unwrapped section>

 

Cheers,

Niklas, for the chairs

 

 

On 2024-05-16, 18:41, "Mallory Knodel via Datatracker" <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

 

Reviewer: Mallory Knodel
Review result: Ready with Issues

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="">>.

Document: draft-ietf-asdf-sdf-??
Reviewer: Mallory Knodel
Review Date: 2024-05-14
IETF LC End Date: 2024-05-22
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

-- 
last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux