As I’m a proven HTTP-in-email idiot and I think I can get away with this,
I’ll top post my answers.
Comment 1 - I’m as happy with data begin singular as well as plural, so long
as it’s consistent. So, using the singular form is fine here.
Comment 2 - Yes, ‘require’ works.
For the rest - I agree with all of the offered fixes.
From: Byron Ellacott <bje(_at_)apnic(_dot_)net>
Date: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 at 20:33
To: Edward Lewis <edward(_dot_)lewis(_at_)icann(_dot_)org>,
"ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org" <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>,
"iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org" <iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Cc: "weirds(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org" <weirds(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>, Andy Newton
<andy(_at_)arin(_dot_)net>,
"nkong(_at_)cnnic(_dot_)cn" <nkong(_at_)cnnic(_dot_)cn>
Subject: Re: [weirds] Last Call: <draft-ietf-weirds-using-http-13.txt>
(HTTP usage in the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)) to Proposed
Standard
Responses inline...
On 18/10/2014 12:15 am, "Edward Lewis"
<edward(_dot_)lewis(_at_)icann(_dot_)org> wrote:
Comment 1
---------
Section 1.
## The registration data expected to be presented by this service is
## Internet resource registration data - registration of domain names
## and Internet number resources. These data is typically provided by
Nit: ''These data is'':
Perhaps - remove the Œ¹The'' to start the paragraph and then ''Such data
are''
for the Nit. (Treat Œ¹data'' consistently as singular or plural.)
Good catch. I suspect "These data is" was meant to be "This data is",
using "data" as a collective noun. I agree with removing 'The', but
personally prefer "This data is".
Comment 2
---------
Section 3.
Nit: ''meant to return only one path of execution'' - perhaps ''follow one
path''?
How would s/return/require/ work for you? The notion is that a protocol
matching this design intent would not lead to clients having branching or
tree searching operations, so for me "follow one path" describes a client
behaviour more than a protocol expectation.
Comment 3
---------
Section 5.6.
Nit: ''As the use of RDAP is for public resources'' is a judgement call.
Suggest
rewording as ''When RDAP is for public resources, a value of Œ*¹. . .''
I agree with the premise of this nit. The entire sentence then reads:
When RDAP is for public resources, a value of "*" is suitable for most
cases.
How about something a little less tortuous:
A value of "*" is suitable when RDAP is used for public resources.
Comment 5
---------
Section 7.
Nit: ''It does require the RDAP clients MUST support HTTPS.''
Nit: ''This document made'' should be ''This document makes''
=> "It does require that RDAP clients MUST support HTTPS."
And agree on made => makes.
Comment 7
---------
Appendix B
Nit: ''this is unlikely to have any known side effects'' - suggest ''this
will be[/ought to be] compatible with the RDAP definition.''
How about we be more assertive:
"... this is compatible with the RDAP definition."
Thanks for looking over the doc closely!
--
bje
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature