Reviewer: Julian Reschke Review result: Ready with Nits Nits: General: there's an *enormous* amount of repetition in the text. For instance, how many times does it say that the deprecation might be in the future or the past? Also, see end of Section 2.1. Section 2.1 Cites both the approved spec 8941bis and RFC 8941. "Deprecation = sf-date" comes surprising now that the ABNF reference is gone. Maybe just pull it into the prose, otherwise people not aware of ABNF might not know what this means. Example: maybe use UTC instead of GMT? Section 3 Introduction should link to RFC 8288. Section 4 "different data type" - the type actually is almost the same; maybe "format" would be clearer Section 6 Micro-nit: the templates use artwork format, they should be lists (will likely done by RFC Editor though) Section 8.1 The reference to RFC 9111 is only used in the implementation report, so by definition it can't be normative. I'd even remove it altogether from the reference section, given the fact the the implementation appendix will be removed. Section 8.2 For the same reason, I'd remove the reference to RFC7942. -- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
