[Last-Call] Re: Iotdir telechat review of draft-ietf-core-cf-reg-update-07

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Thomas,

Great, going to reply on the github issues directly (if needed clarification).

Thank you!

On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 4:57 PM Thomas Fossati
<thomas.fossati@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Renzo,
>
> On Fri, 18 Apr 2025 at 18:08, Renzo Navas via Datatracker
> <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Document: draft-ietf-core-cf-reg-update
> > Title: Update to the IANA CoAP Content-Formats Registration Procedures
> > Reviewer: Renzo Navas
> > Review result: Ready with Nits
> >
> > Disclaimer: I have not been following this document, so I do not have any
> > context that leads to his current state.
> >
> > I categorize my review as “Ready w/nits”, because even if I am being too
> > verbose, most of my comments are about clarification of some terms (lowercase /
> > capitalisation), and some hints that can lead to clarification of some
> > sentences. Other than these “nits” with terms; the document is clear,
> > “negative” examples (section 3) are useful to exemplify what can go wrong, and,
> > most importantly, the new procedure (Section 4) is quite clear! Thank you for
> > this work.
> >
> > ------------------
> > COMMENTS BEGIN
> > -------------------
> >
> > Section 2. Lowercase terms seem ok (also used this way in RFC9193), except for
> > the “content-type” term that is defined and used as “Content-Type” in RFC9193.
> > Do we want all lowercase terms ? (This term in particular is used only once
> > later in the document). In any case, the passage
> > “term->term_rfc9193->definition” can be done unambiguously so not a problem.
> >
> > Section 3.3, How do we determine if a parameter’s value is valid ? (given an
> > existing media type parameter)? (We have to track the values on the “Reference”
> > column on the Media Type register? E.g., for “cose;cose-type=”, I could not
> > find it on IANA https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/cose ,
> > but have to read RFC9052). OK after reading the document, all these cases
> > (invalid or unknown stuff) will need an “Expert Review” . SUGGESTION: maybe put
> > a small disclaimer at the beginning of the section? For example: "Unknown or
> > Invalid values will be detected by a Expert Review".
> >
> > Section 4. I think we should erase the word "virtual" (unless it has a specific
> > meaning, which in that case is not clear what that meaning is).
> >
> > Section 4.3: Commenting just to say: amazing QoL addition!
> >
> > Section 4.4. In item 1 the term “content coding” is used , but on item 5 the
> > term “Content Coding” is used, are those different terms or the same? As
> > defined in Section 2 those terms were all lowercase... if this is the same term
> > (thus, same meaning) I suggest you should be consistent throughout the document
> > with the capitalization. If this is a different term.. Well, that is a bit
> > confusing, and these other terms will need another definition. You can also say
> > that you are case insensitive in Section 2 (but in any case, I suggest being
> > consistent with capitalization to avoid all this).
> >
> > After carefully reading things, I think the term in item 5 is referring to the
> > “Content Coding” Column in the CoAP Content-Formats IANA Registry, so maybe
> > explicitly say "If a Content Coding registry value"... I left my initial
> > comments/doubts about terms with/without capitalization just to make the point
> > that maybe where there is that subtlety, the text can help the reader with a
> > bit of signposting (e.g., add "registry value" in the case I mentioned). (Also,
> > we are not case insensitive, because in this excerpt the term upper/lower-case
> > made a difference; so explicitly say the terms are case sensitive in Section
> > 2?).
>
> Thanks very much for your thorough review.
>
> We are tracking your comments using the following issues:
>
> https://github.com/core-wg/cf-reg-update/issues/72
> https://github.com/core-wg/cf-reg-update/issues/73
> https://github.com/core-wg/cf-reg-update/issues/74
> https://github.com/core-wg/cf-reg-update/issues/75
> https://github.com/core-wg/cf-reg-update/issues/76
>
> We'll be back to you as soon as we start processing them.
>
> cheers!

-- 
last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux