Re: [regext] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces-07

Peter, thanks for your review. James, thanks for responding. I entered a No Objection ballot.

Alissa

> On Feb 10, 2021, at 8:59 AM, Gould, James <jgould=40verisign.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Peter,
> 
> Thank you for your review and feedback.  I provide responses to your feedback embedded below.  The updates based on your feedback and other feedback received will be included in draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces-08.  
> 
> -- 
> 
> JG
> 
> 
> 
> James Gould
> Fellow Engineer
> jgould@Verisign.com <applewebdata://13890C55-AAE8-4BF3-A6CE-B4BA42740803/jgould@Verisign.com>
> 
> 703-948-3271
> 12061 Bluemont Way
> Reston, VA 20190
> 
> Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com/>
> 
> On 2/9/21, 11:49 PM, "Peter Yee via Datatracker" <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
>    Reviewer: Peter Yee
>    Review result: Ready with Nits
> 
>    I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
>    Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
>    by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
>    like any other last call comments.
> 
>    For more information, please see the FAQ at
> 
>    <https://secure-web.cisco.com/18XJ21QUB_6pM8xC9AxgAF1lQGdVTQGVD3ttr64Abh4xtYEHewGl5EW-GJTbRbKJMuPV8KyCHx1maHQo1jcsWHiNDDCjzavgOvt7VfmB_DlWdSxxhJXOvjbAwge8wZIjdMPCAq5-if9dJdaBbleGZzdSxIhW0jK8ZHx78azgsy9giuHdjzxHH2_RuqllFCneH9ssvSaqyoF-hnGcZykWhn56qLfTatUWQEhL4KRkUvw0jSIB3S5LnrX7UcsJWrlEd/https%3A%2F%2Ftrac.ietf.org%2Ftrac%2Fgen%2Fwiki%2FGenArtfaq>.
> 
>    Document: draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces-07
>    Reviewer: Peter Yee
>    Review Date: 2021-02-09
>    IETF LC End Date: 2021-02-09
>    IESG Telechat date: 2021-02-18
> 
>    Summary: This EPP draft specifies a means to send information about unhandled
>    namespace (a service that the client or server isn't prepared to handle) by
>    means of reusing <extValue>. To the extent of my limited knowledge of EPP, this
>    draft is ready with nits.
> 
>    Major issues: None
> 
>    Minor issues: None
> 
>    Nits/editorial comments:
> 
>    General:
> 
>    I'm not totally taken with the term "template" for XML examples that aren't
>    wholly templates. On the other hand, I'd like to think that any implementers of
>    EPP would recognize which parts were truly template-like and which parts are
>    borrowed from the various EPP RFCs for example.
> 
> JG - Correct, those that are aware of EPP should be able to pick-up on the use of the placeholder content variables.  In the section 1.1 "Conventions Used in This Document", we did define the placeholder content variables used in the template XML for clarity.  
> 
>    A few of the XML examples do not indent the urn in the <reason> block. While
>    that shouldn't matter for the meaning or parsing, the indentation is done
>    inconsistently. If this was intentional (e.g., to prevent wrapping of long
>    lines), then leave it as is. While I don't think of the lines were longer than
>    allowed even if two spaces were inserted before "urn", the easier visual
>    parsing would be appreciated.
> 
> JG - The instances that you're referring to are located in section 6, where adding a space for the "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:changePoll-1.0" unhandled namespace results in "Warning: Artwork too wide, reducing indentation from 3 to 2".  The "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0" unhandled namespace can have two spaces added, but that would be inconsistent with the "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:changePoll-1.0" unhandled namespace in the same example.  I'll go ahead and add the two spaces to the "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0" unhandled namespace.
> 
>    Specific:
> 
>    Page 6, 1st paragraph following XML, 1st phrase: append "for an" after
>    "Template".
> 
> JG - Done 
> 
>    Page 6, 1st paragraph following second block of XML, 2nd sentence: insert "an"
>    before "example of".
> 
> JG - Done
> 
>    Page 7, 1st phrase: change the period to a colon to be similar to RFC 5730's
>    style for examples.
> 
> JG - Done
> 
>    Page 7, section 3.2, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: change "a" to "an" before
>    "[RFC5730] <extValue>".
> 
> JG - Done
> 
>    Page 9, 1st phrase: change the period to a colon to be similar to RFC 5730's
>    style for examples.
> 
> JG - Done
> 
>    Page 10, section 4, 1st sentence: insert "a" before "new". Insert "rather
>    specifies" before "an operational".  Or something similar.
> 
> JG - Done.  I used the "rather specifies".  
> 
>    Page 16, item 3, 1st sentence: consider deleting the comma after "EPP
>    responses".
> 
> JG - Done
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art