Re: Gen-art review of draft-lear-iana-timezone-database-03

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

Hi Elwyn,

Thank you again for the review.  Please see below.

> Summary:
> Almost ready for the IESG.  This is my second review of the document.  
>
> I suggested in the previous review that it might make life easier, particularly 
> if an appeal was ever entered, if the document didn't use the RFC 5226 Designated 
> Expert mechanism but defined the role separately.  This hasn't happened but the 
> distinction is now clearer.  To make it quite clear I would be inclined to add 
> 'except as regards appeals against decisions of the Designated Expert 
> (see Section 5)' after [RFC5226] in the definition of TZ Coordinator in Section 2.

I've adopted your above suggested wording.

> Otherwise there are a couple of editorial nits.   
>
> .
> Nits/Editorial:
> s3: s/policy policy/policy/ (repeated word)

Corrected.
> s8, first para: s/filling/filling the role/ (maybe 'post')

This text changed based on another review.

> s8, last para: s/TZ Coordinators/TZ Coordinator/

Corrected.
> s10: s/Elwin/Elwyn/ (thanks for the ack!)

Corrected and apologies! I hate when that happens to me!

Eliot