Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-murdock-nato-nid-02.txt

[Jari Arkko <[e-mail]>]

Thanks, Dan and Barry. 

Is there a new rev or RFC Editor -notes?

On 20 Nov 2014, at 15:13, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Barry,
> 
> This looks reasonable, thanks for the timely response and for addressing my comments. I suggest that the editor also fixes the text in section 7. 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of
>> Barry Leiba
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 8:53 PM
>> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
>> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
>> Subject: Re: Gen-ART review of draft-murdock-nato-nid-02.txt
>> 
>> Thanks for the review, Dan.
>> 
>>> 1.       The document does not expand the acronym NATO at the first
>>> occurrence. Moreover, in section 7 it mentions 'that a standards body,
>>> like NATO' which is misleading - as NATO is not a standards body. I
>>> suggest to use the full name in the title and abstract, expand the
>>> acronym at first occurrence and correct the text in Section 7.
>> 
>> The AD/shepherd agrees.
>> 
>>> 2.       The abstract and introduction should make clear that this is a
>>> request made according to RFC 3406 for a formal URN space type, as
>>> described in Section 4.3 of RFC 3406.
>> 
>> I suppose that I agree with that, too, though I think it's less important.  But
>> something like this should do nicely:
>> 
>> OLD
>>   This document describes a Uniform Resource Name (URN) namespace for
>>   assignment by NATO.  The current primary use is for uniquely
>>   identifying Extensible Markup Language (XML) artifacts that provide
>>   information about NATO message text formats and service
>>   specifications as described in various NATO standards [4],
>>   instructions and publications.
>> 
>> NEW
>>   This document allocates a formal Uniform Resource Name (URN)
>>   namespace for assignment by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
>>   (NATO), as specified in RFC 3406.  The current primary use is for
>>   uniquely identifying Extensible Markup Language (XML) artifacts
>>   that provide information about NATO message text formats and
>>   service specifications as described in various NATO standards,
>>   instructions and publications.
>> 
>> END
>> 
>> (That also removes the reference ("[4]") in the abstract, as the RFC Editor
>> doesn't allow references in abstracts.)  And then a similar change in the
>> Introduction section.
>> 
>>> I could not find in the summary written by the AD shepherd an
>>> indication whether this review occurred.
>> 
>> The AD/shepherd apologises profusely for his typo: the writeup said "uri-
>> review", where it should have said "urn-nid".  I've corrected the error in the
>> writeup, and, yes, the review happened.
>> 
>> Ira, I'm going to move the document into IESG Evaluation state now.
>> Please update the I-D as soon as you can with the above minor changes.
>> Thanks.
>> 
>> Barry
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art