Hi Mallory,
thanks for the review!

I’ve unwrapped the comments but have made no other edits to them.

<start of unwrapped section>

Major issues: None.


Minor issues:

* 1.1. The definition for "Grouping" is unsatisfying. Its definition relies on
   other terminology that invokes this term, resulting self-referential
   definitions. "Grouping: An sdfThing or sdfObject, i.e., (directly or
   indirectly) a combination of Affordances." What, as well, is the relationship
   to the defined term "Group"?

* 1.1. "Affordance" might appear after "Thing". As a general comment, perhaps
   the terminology section requires a sweep to better organise the order of
   definitions for improved and easier comprehension. For example, the order of
   Augmentation Mechanism and Protocol Binding should probably be swapped.

* General comment, and 1.1., "object" and "map" are mentioned throughout
   (almost 200+ together) yet the treatment of the relationship of these two
   terms in JSON is rather cavalier. For dispelling confusion, suggest entering
   both as separate terms that clearly indicate they are interchangeable, and
   when they are not.

* 4.2. It is unclear how this description relates to Figure 1. Suggest
   invoking the relationship to Figure 1 but entirely reworking Figure 1 as a
   new figure for this section with the example URLs indicated explicitly.


Nits/editorial comments:

* The capitalisation of terms defined in 1.1. appear inconsistently in the
   text.

* 1. Suggest Conventions as a separate subsection as 1.2. and to include the
   short paragraph about byte, the one convention expressed already, as well as
   the BCP 14 text.

* 2.1. Parentheticals might be minimised overall, but for example:

** (The third type of affordance [sic] is Events, which are not described in
   this example.) -- This can just be a sentence.

               ** ... how (with the exception of the info group) maps that 
have... -- The
   parenthetical is both disruptive to the sentence because of where it's placed
   and also indicates important information as an exception, thereby suggesting
   it should be its own sentence.

* 2.2.2. para 2 -- Parenthetical can be a sentence.

* 2.3.3. penultimate para -- "(one or more)" should not be in parenthensis.
   * et cetera.

* 4.5. bullet 2: "The affordance/grouping itself..." since affordance and
   grouping are two separate terms, suggest "The affordance or grouping
   itself..."

* 4.7. item 1 para 2: Again, unwise to put a SHOULD NOT in a parenthetical.

* Suggest referencing RFC8610 when the use of CDDL is first introduced,
   rather than first in the security considerations and then in the appendix.

<end of unwrapped section>

Cheers,
Niklas, for the chairs


On 2024-05-16, 18:41, "Mallory Knodel via Datatracker" <nore...@ietf.org> wrote:

Reviewer: Mallory Knodel
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://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.ietf.org%2Fen%2Fgroup%2Fgen%2FGenArtFAQ&data=05%7C02%7Cniklas.widell%40ericsson.com%7C568ba0aeb3b94003743c08dc75c70425%7C92e84cebfbfd47abbe52080c6b87953f%7C0%7C0%7C638514744827068481%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=n3d6QDaUN63allZpzc1Ujsmrl1R3EQzlewMSL5waYZk%3D&reserved=0<https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>>.

Document: draft-ietf-asdf-sdf-??
Reviewer: Mallory Knodel
Review Date: 2024-05-14
IETF LC End Date: 2024-05-22
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list -- gen-art@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to gen-art-le...@ietf.org

Reply via email to