IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Help with tools/process to review a draft

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Wed, 08 April 2015 14:11 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A4DD1AC3E1 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Apr 2015 07:11:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NM8rhWEGGWes for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Apr 2015 07:11:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69A551B30AB for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Apr 2015 07:11:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.87] (76-218-8-156.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.8.156]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t38EB8GF022293 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 8 Apr 2015 07:11:12 -0700
Message-ID: <552536FB.5030503@dcrocker.net>
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2015 07:11:07 -0700
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Mukom Akong T." <mukom.tamon@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Help with tools/process to review a draft
References: <CAHDzDLAW=yLAGankhdhTDQ-CO+y7waxC569SR_qjAGtv_W0fXw@mail.gmail.com> <m2twwrjw24.wl%randy@psg.com> <CAHDzDLDfpdNxT_=cdCHkVgoJUgfO3K+3yQnr8MFk3Uh4XE3Jsw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-cCwhsAQ76-cQ--5d2u_0rCJy+PAcsDXPiNFseJi+Zd5g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKKJt-cCwhsAQ76-cQ--5d2u_0rCJy+PAcsDXPiNFseJi+Zd5g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.66]); Wed, 08 Apr 2015 07:11:12 -0700 (PDT)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/VxziJkxqNUCUGWh4QIWJE1v-3v8>
Cc: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2015 14:11:38 -0000

On 4/8/2015 5:22 AM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:
> Many reviewers use a "major issues", "minor issues", "editorial issues"
> organization.


It helps to start with a /very/ concise summary of the nature of the
document.  What is it for?  What does it do?  How does it do it?  This
establishes that your understanding of the document matches what the
author(s) intended.

My own approach to commenting, after that, is to summarize the major
issues in some free text, after the summary, and then to provide a
single set of in-line comments of the document.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email