Re: FW: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-saintandre-rfc4622bis-01

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Tue, 21 August 2007 19:52 UTC

Return-path: <gen-art-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1INZli-0007cH-TU; Tue, 21 Aug 2007 15:52:02 -0400
Received: from gen-art by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1INYNp-0000Qs-3Z for gen-art-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 21 Aug 2007 14:23:17 -0400
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1INYNo-0000Qi-Ox for gen-art@ietf.org; Tue, 21 Aug 2007 14:23:16 -0400
Received: from dencfw1.jabber.com ([207.182.164.5] helo=wrk225.corp.jabber.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1INYNn-0007ty-QR for gen-art@ietf.org; Tue, 21 Aug 2007 14:23:16 -0400
Received: from wrk225.corp.jabber.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wrk225.corp.jabber.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CC0363CD59; Tue, 21 Aug 2007 12:25:34 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <46CB2E1D.5050807@stpeter.im>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 12:25:33 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.8.1.6) Gecko/20070728 Thunderbird/2.0.0.6 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vkg@alcatel-lucent.com
Subject: Re: FW: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-saintandre-rfc4622bis-01
References: <20070821175539.GB18815@jabber.org>
In-Reply-To: <20070821175539.GB18815@jabber.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.3
OpenPGP: id=7BBD0573; url=http://www.saint-andre.com/me/stpeter.asc
Jabber-ID: stpeter@jabber.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: e8a67952aa972b528dd04570d58ad8fe
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 15:52:02 -0400
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org, lisa@osafoundation.org
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: gen-art-bounces@ietf.org

Thank you for the review. I'm moving email addresses right now, so
replying from my new address. Comments inline.

Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> ----- Forwarded message from "Vijay K. Gurbani" <vkg@alcatel-lucent.com> -----
> 
> From: "Vijay K. Gurbani" <vkg@alcatel-lucent.com>
> To: stpeter@jabber.org
> CC: lisa@osafoundation.org, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>
> Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-saintandre-rfc4622bis-01
> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.37
> 
> I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
> reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
> http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
> 
> Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
> or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
> 
> Document: draft-saintandre-rfc4622bis-01
> Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani
> Review Date: 21 Aug 2007
> IESG Telechat date: 1 Sept 2007
> 
> Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard.
> 
> This is a short draft that defines the use of IRIs and URIs
> in XMPP communications.  A few nits follow:
> 
> 1) In a few places, [IRI], [IDNA] et al. are used as a reference
>  holder as well as a subject, example in S2.2:
> 
>   "...to convert [IRI] syntax into [IDNA] syntax ..."
> 
>  You may want to reconsider rewriting these as follows:
> 
>   "... to convert IRI syntax [IRI] into IDNA syntax [IDNA]..."
> 
>  for better readability.

Good point. I have cleaned that up in my working copy.

> 2) S2.5: s/examples include but are not/examples include, but are not/

Fixed.

> 3) In S2.7.2 and S2.8.2, XMPP addresses continue to the next line.
>  Do you need LWS at the beginning of the second line to denote
>  continuation?

It's not clear to me how best to represent the line breaks. I will
inquire of this with the RFC Editor.

> 4) S3.8, consider s/XXXX/this document

Done.

Peter

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



_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art