Adrian,
On 11/25/24 1:38 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
Hi Paul,
Thanks for the review. It's very helpful to improve the document.
The changes made are reflected below.
I don't see a -08 reflecting the changes you describe.
[snip]
You raise a reasonable point.
I think capitalisation will be helpful.
And we will add some recommendations for other documents using these terms,
such as:
Other documents may make use of the terms as defined in this
document. It is suggested here that such uses should use
capitalization of the terms as in this document, and should
include an early section listing the terms inherited from this
document with a citation.
Sounds good.
2) ISSUE: Unclear Figure notation
[snip]
Ah, I think I begin to understand that you hoped the arrows represented some
specific explicit function that is the same in each case?
They don't. They are just a general flow of control. And the explanation is all
in the text.
Yes, that is what I was hoping for. Ideally some well defined notation,
like UML, where every bit of the figure has well defined meaning.
But I realize there often isn't any predefined notation. In that case I
hope that things be sufficiently labeled in the diagram and explained to
the text to make it unambiguous.
Let me know when a new version is posted and I'll take another look.
Thanks,
Paul
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list -- gen-art@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to gen-art-le...@ietf.org
