Re: [lamps] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-lamps-documentsigning-eku-05: (with COMMENT)

[Sean Turner <[e-mail]>]

Addressed via:
https://github.com/lamps-wg/documentsigning-eku/pull/20

> On Aug 23, 2022, at 11:24, Lars Eggert via Datatracker <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-lamps-documentsigning-eku-05: No Objection
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
> for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lamps-documentsigning-eku/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> # GEN AD review of draft-ietf-lamps-documentsigning-eku-05
> 
> CC @larseggert
> 
> Thanks to Dale Worley for the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) review
> (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/1T23l8-kN8pEMqnQvh1ir3MsGVw)
> 
> ## Comments
> 
> ### Section 4, paragraph 1
> ```
>     The signed contents of Internet-Drafts are primarily intended to be
> ```
> Did you mean "documents" here instead of "Internet-Drafts"?
> 
> ## Nits
> 
> All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to
> address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by
> automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool) so there
> will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you
> did with these suggestions.
> 
> ### Typos
> 
> #### Section 1, paragraph 3
> ```
> -    owner but by another vendor, the vender who own the KeyPurposeIds may
> -                                         ^
> -    not able to control use, or even do not know about the use. - If the
> -                                                                -
> +    owner but by another vendor, the vendor who own the KeyPurposeIds may
> +                                         ^
> ```
> 
> #### Section 4, paragraph 5
> ```
> -       party software proresses each restriction on "Excluded
> -                         ^
> +       party software processes each restriction on "Excluded
> +                         ^
> ```
> 
> ### Grammar/style
> 
> #### Section 4, paragraph 8
> ```
> the format it is handling (e.g. text, pdf, etc). 5. Implications for a Certif
>                                      ^^^
> ```
> File types are normally capitalized.
> 
> #### Section 4, paragraph 8
> ```
> ormat it is handling (e.g. text, pdf, etc). 5. Implications for a Certificati
>                                      ^^^
> ```
> A period is needed after the abbreviation "etc.".
> 
> ## Notes
> 
> This review is in the ["IETF Comments" Markdown format][ICMF], You can use the
> [`ietf-comments` tool][ICT] to automatically convert this review into
> individual GitHub issues. Review generated by the [`ietf-reviewtool`][IRT].
> 
> [ICMF]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md
> [ICT]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments
> [IRT]: https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool
> 
> 
>