Dear Sarah, Please find our responses to your questions on behalf of all authors:
============================================================================= 1) As there may have been multiple updates made to the document during Last Call, please review the current version of the document: The text in the Abstract is still accurate, References, Author's Addresses, Contributors and Acknowledgments are current. 2) Please share any style information that could help us with editing your document. For example: The document terminology relies on, and needs to be consistent with RFC9053 and RFC9162. Terms are defined in the Terminology section and capitalized, other aspects of the document follow conventions established in RFC9053 and RFC9162. 3) Is there any text that should be handled extra cautiously? For example, are there any sections that were contentious when the document was drafted? No. 4) Is there anything else that the RPC should be aware of while editing this document? No. 5) This document uses one or more of the following text styles. Are these elements used consistently? * fixed width font (<tt/> or `) * italics (<em/> or *) * bold (<strong/> or **) Yes they are. 6) This document contains sourcecode: * Does the sourcecode validate? Yes, the source code is either EDN (automatically generated) or CDDL (validates). * Some sourcecode types (e.g., YANG) require certain references and/or text in the Security Considerations section. Is this information correct? N/A * Is the sourcecode type indicated in the XML? (see information about sourcecode types). N/A 7) Would you like to participate in the RPC Pilot Test for editing in kramdown-rfc? No thank you. ============================================================================= Best regards, Antoine Delignat-Lavaud ________________________________ From: Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2025 14:47 To: [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; Antoine Delignat-Lavaud <[email protected]>; Cedric Fournet <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Document intake questions about <draft-ietf-cose-merkle-tree-proofs-17> [You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] Author(s), Congratulations, your document has been successfully added to the RFC Editor queue! The team at the RFC Production Center (RPC) is looking forward to working with you as your document moves forward toward publication. To help reduce processing time and improve editing accuracy, please respond to the questions below. Please confer with your coauthors (or authors of other documents if your document is in a cluster) as necessary prior to taking action in order to streamline communication. If your document has multiple authors, only one author needs to reply to this message. As you read through the rest of this email: * If you need/want to make updates to your document, we encourage you to make those changes and resubmit to the Datatracker. This allows for the easy creation of diffs, which facilitates review by interested parties (e.g., authors, ADs, doc shepherds). * If you feel no updates to the document are necessary, please reply with any applicable rationale/comments. Please note that the RPC team will not work on your document until we hear from you (that is, your document will remain in AUTH state until we receive a reply). Even if you don't have guidance or don't feel that you need to make any updates to the document, you need to let us know. After we hear from you, your document will start moving through the queue. You will be able to review and approve our updates during AUTH48. Please feel free to contact us with any questions you may have at [email protected]. Thank you! The RPC Team -- 1) As there may have been multiple updates made to the document during Last Call, please review the current version of the document: * Is the text in the Abstract is still accurate? * Are the References, Authors' Addresses, Contributors, and Acknowledgments sections current? 2) Please share any style information that could help us with editing your document. For example: * Is your document's format or its terminology based on another document? If so, please provide a pointer to that document (e.g., this document's terminology should match DNS terminology in RFC 9499). * Is there a pattern of capitalization or formatting of terms? (e.g., field names should have initial capitalization; parameter names should be in double quotes; <tt/> should be used for token names; etc.) 3) Is there any text that should be handled extra cautiously? For example, are there any sections that were contentious when the document was drafted? 4) Is there anything else that the RPC should be aware of while editing this document? 5) This document uses one or more of the following text styles. Are these elements used consistently? * fixed width font (<tt/> or `) * italics (<em/> or *) * bold (<strong/> or **) 6) This document contains sourcecode: * Does the sourcecode validate? * Some sourcecode types (e.g., YANG) require certain references and/or text in the Security Considerations section. Is this information correct? * Is the sourcecode type indicated in the XML? (see information about sourcecode types). 7) Would you like to participate in the RPC Pilot Test for editing in kramdown-rfc? If so, please let us know and provide a self-contained kramdown-rfc file. For more information about this experiment, see: https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Frpc%2Fwiki%2Fdoku.php%3Fid%3Dpilot_test_kramdown_rfc&data=05%7C02%7Cantdl%40microsoft.com%7Cc784e77652254f1f0bb908ddf139bf89%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638931952705617522%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=0hHlkK%2BtgnOW%2BuABGgGi6K5qPMYp%2ByFm0POxFF0OpMw%3D&reserved=0<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc>.
-- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
