Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-json-i-json-05

[Jari Arkko <[e-mail]>]

Thanks for your review, Meral.

Have you authors observed the comments and taken all actions that you think are necessary?

FWIW, I have placed the following position on the ballot for tonight’s IESG call:

No Objection - I should note that there was a Gen-ART review from Meral with some minor editorial observations. For instance, the first sentence of Section 3 could use improvement. These could be handled by the RFC Editor, too.

jari

On 14 Jan 2015, at 10:00, Meral Shirazipour <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq.
>  
> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive.
>  
> Document: draft-ietf-json-i-json-05
> Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour
> Review Date: 2015-01-14
> IETF LC End Date:  2015-01-14
> IESG Telechat date: NA
>  
>  
> Summary:
> This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC but I have some comments .
>  
>  
> Nits/editorial comments:
> -Please spell out acronyms at first use. E.g. JSON, I-JSON
>  
> -[Page 3], "treat an integer", it would be good to mention this is still referring to IEEE754 format.
>  
> -[Page 3],"(one example would be 64-bit integers)", here not clear if still IEEE7544 is discussed or integer format. If latter, is it signed/unsigned.
> "RECOMMENDED to encode them in JSON string values." should this be done in decimal format then?
>  
> -[Page 4], Section 3, "in the JSON messages it receives."--->"in the JSON messages they receives."
>  
> -[Page 4], "receiving implementation"---->"receiving implementations"
>  
> Best Regards,
> Meral
> ---
> Meral Shirazipour
> Ericsson
> Research
> www.ericsson.com
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art