[urn] editorial comments on draft-ietf-urnbis-ns-reg-transition-01

[Peter Saint-Andre <[e-mail]>]

Thanks to John and Juha for working on this document. Overall I think 
the substance is fine. Here are a few small editorial issues I noticed.

1. Expand URN on first use:

    As a part of the initial development of the Uniform Resource Name
   (URN) system...

2. This is a bit awkward:

    model that focuses more on attempting to get all namespaces that
    follow the syntax of formal ones registered

I suggest:

    model that focuses more on encouraging registration of all
    namespaces that follow the formal namespace syntax

3. There's a stray word here:

    collected as a possible consistent with that goal

Should be:

    collected as possible consistent with that goal

4. A missing and:

   [RFC3044], International Standard Book Numbers (ISBNs) [RFC3187]

Should be:

   [RFC3044] and International Standard Book Numbers (ISBNs) [RFC3187]

5. This text might be slightly ambiguous:

    For both ISSN and ISBN URNs, it is intended that the registrations
    track the evolution of ISO standardization without requiring
    resubmission of the templates or other formal IETF or IANA
    registration update approval procedures.

I assume that refers to the current registrations, not any future 
registrations.

6. This is a bit of a run-on sentence:

    The revised ISBN namespace reflects the updated version of the ISO
    Standard for ISBNs, ISO 2108:2005 [ISO-ISBN-b] and allows for the use
    of both the ten character numbers described in RFC 3187 and the
    earlier ISO 2108:1992 [ISO-ISBN-a] (known as ISBN-10) and the
    expanded ones of the revised standard (known as ISBN-13).

Perhaps:

    The revised ISBN namespace reflects the updated version of the ISO
    Standard for ISBNs, ISO 2108:2005 [ISO-ISBN-b].  The namespace
    allows for the use of both the ten character numbers described in
    RFC 3187 and the earlier ISO 2108:1992 [ISO-ISBN-a] (known as
    ISBN-10), as well as the expanded ones of the revised standard
    (known as ISBN-13).

7. Typo here:

    IANA is requested to update the registry entries for URN ISSNs,
    ISBNs, and NRNs

I assume that "NBNs" is meant instead of "NRNs".

8. I sense some ambiguity here:

    IANA is requested to update the registry entries for URN ISSNs,
    ISBNs, and NRNs to reflect the new, RFC 3406bis-complaint templates
    as soon as they are available and to no longer reference the now-
    historic RFCs.  Other registrations and templates conforming to the
    newer rules may be substituted for the older ones when they are
    available.  However, neither this document nor RFC 3406bis
    invalidates existing registrations other than those listed above, so
    IANA needs to be prepared to maintain a registry whose contents
    reflect both old and new templates.

I think "other registrations and templates" might be referring to 
registrations and templates for namespaces other than ISSN, ISBN, and NBN.

I think "supersedes" might be more appropriate than "invalidates".

And I think "a registry whose contents reflect both old and new 
templates" does not imply that IANA would point to both an old and a new 
template for the same namespace, but for different namespaces.

Thus I suggest:

    IANA is requested to update the registry entries for URN ISSNs,
    ISBNs, and NBNs to reflect the new, RFC 3406bis-complaint templates
    as soon as they are available and to no longer reference the now-
    historic RFCs for those namespaces.  With respect to namespaces
    other than those listed above, registrations and templates
    conforming to the newer rules may be substituted for the older ones
    when they are available.  However, neither this document nor RFC
    3406bis supersedes existing registrations other than those listed
    above.  Therefore, IANA needs to be prepared to maintain a registry
    whose contents reflect old templates for some namespaces and new
    templates for other namespaces.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/