Robert, some fixes were posted over the weekend - if you have a chance, please check the diff here:
https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-hakala-urn-nbn-rfc3188bis-01.txt Thanks! Peter On 5/1/18 12:35 PM, Robert Sparks wrote: > Reviewer: Robert Sparks > Review result: Ready with Issues > > 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://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. > > Document: draft-hakala-urn-nbn-rfc3188bis-00 > Reviewer: Robert Sparks > Review Date: 2018-05-01 > IETF LC End Date: 2018-05-21 > IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat > > Summary: Almost ready for publication as an Information RFC but with issues > that need to be addressed before publication. > > Why is there no shepherd's writeup? It would be good to explicitly let the > community know why this is proceeding as an individual draft. > > Issues: > > The document uses 2119 in some inappropriate ways. It's fine to use 2119 terms > when defining how to construct NBN URNs. It's not ok to use them in places > like > "the national library MUST", and "A national library ... SHOULD specify ... a > policy" and "libraries MUST agree". Please find a way to say that if a > national > library wants things to work, they will or should do these things. > > While I agree with the values expressed, it seems odd for the URN registration > to try to put constraints on fees that a national library might collect > (especially using a 2119 SHOULD). > > Nits/editorial comments: > > The section calling out this draft replaces > draft-ietf-urnbis-rfc3188bis-nbn-urn should be removed (its enough to add > RFC editor instructions to the draft or to the ballot writeup). > > "identifiers identifiers" occurs in the second paragraph on page 4. > > The ABNF in "Declaration of syntactic structure of NSS part" needs to be > reformatted to meet the RFC constraints on line length. > > Consider "physical" instead of "hand-held" in the first paragraph of 3.1. > A national library may choose to assign an NBN to something too large to pick > up. > > >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
