Re: [apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ohye-canonical-link-relation-04

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Thu, 15 December 2011 17:31 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A5F621F8A7A; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:31:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.079
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.079 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.480, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sO2awsHQ2b7j; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:31:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 656E421F8A35; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:31:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-64-101-72-220.cisco.com (unknown [64.101.72.220]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 83791423D8; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:39:06 -0700 (MST)
Message-ID: <4EEA2EEE.1050308@stpeter.im>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:31:26 -0700
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Yoshiro YONEYA <yoshiro.yoneya@jprs.co.jp>
References: <20111215182014.856cc247.yoshiro.yoneya@jprs.co.jp>
In-Reply-To: <20111215182014.856cc247.yoshiro.yoneya@jprs.co.jp>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.4
OpenPGP: url=https://stpeter.im/stpeter.asc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: draft-ohye-canonical-link-relation.all@tools.ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org, apps-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ohye-canonical-link-relation-04
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 17:31:27 -0000

<hat type='shepherd'/>

On 12/15/11 2:20 AM, Yoshiro YONEYA wrote:
> I have been selected as the Applications Area Directorate reviewer for
> this draft (for background on appsdir, please see
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/ApplicationsAreaDirectorate).
> 
> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
> you may receive.  Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
> or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
> 
> Document: draft-ohye-canonical-link-relation-04
> Title: The Canonical Link Relation
> Reviewer: Yoshiro Yoneya
> Review Date: 2011-12-15
> IETF Last Call Date: 2011-12-29
> IESG Telechat Date: 2012-01-05
> 
> Summary:
> 
> This draft is almost ready for publication as an Informational RFC but
> has a few issues that should be fixed before publication.
> 
> Major Issues:
> 
> - Section 8: Internationalisation Considerations
> 
>   Refering whole [RFC3986] is too broad. As noted in IESG writeups, this
>   section should refer to section 8 of [RFC5988].

Yes, that would be better.

> Minor Issues:
> 
> - Section3: The Canonical Link Relation
> 
>   Using similar terms such as canonical URI, target URI, and canonical
>   target are confusing.  Including reference or definition of these
>   terms is preferrable.

I think it would be clearer to use only the term from RFC 5988 (i.e.,
"target IRI").

Thanks for the review!

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/