Re: [Slim] [IANA #949701] expert review for draft-ietf-slim-negotiating-human-language (sdp-parameters) and issue 37

[Randall Gellens <[e-mail]>]

At 3:13 PM -0700 4/24/17, Bernard Aboba wrote:

>  Gunnar said:
>
>  "I notice that the comments and solution proposal on the syntax 
> concerns from the IANA review has a lot in common with Issue 34.
> 
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/slim/ticket/34>https://trac.ietf.org/trac/slim/ticket/34
>
>  Both propose a one-line format for all languages in one media 
> and direction, and both are puzzled by the diffuse placement rules 
> for the asterisk parameter.
>  A solution could be searched on these together."
>
>  [BA] Yes, there does appear to be commonality in these 3 
> independent reviews - which is what lead to the suggestion that the 
> draft go back to the WG.

I don't think the draft needs to re-run WG LC or IETF LC; I think can 
consider the edit to be a LC comment revision and therefore 
explicitly asking the group if anyone objects to the change is 
sufficient.

>  Randall -- is there some obvious reason why a syntax collapse 
> cannot be considered?

I've done the edits in my version of -09 and sent an explicit message 
to the group asking if anyone objects.

-- 
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly selected tag: ---------------
Honk if you hate bumper stickers that say "Honk if ..."