>Denis Pinkas wrote: > >> To be positive, I would rather think that an additional sentence >> might be needed to say something like: >> >> "Further updates to the ETSI TS will be available at : >> http://www.etsi.org/services_products/freestandard/home.htm"; > >Something along those lines might be a good idea. Perhaps >"The technical contents of this specification are maintained >by ETSI; further updates to the ETSI TSI will be available at.."
I will propose to add such a sentence at the next meeting on tuesday. ><snip> >> For the main body of the document, the text is perfectly aligned, >> I mean sections 3 to 8. Readers will not be lost between one >> text or the other. >> >> For sections 1 to 2, each document respects its own structure. >> Sections 9 and beyond only exist for the RFC document. >> >> The ETSI TS structure: >> >> Introduction >> 1 Scope >> 2 References >> >> up to section 8. >> >> The RFC structure: >> >> 1. Introduction >> 2. Scope >> >> (...) >> >> 9. Security considerations >> 9.1 Protection of private key >> 9.2 Choice of algorithms >> 10. IANA Considerations >> 11. References >> 11.1 Normative references >> 11.2 Informative references > >There's still unnecessary reordering in Section 9 and the Annexes. > >I'd suggest moving "Security Considerations" (current Section 9) I fear that we would have a problem: there must be a section called "security considerations" in the main body of the document. The RFC editor is unlikely to accept it. Readers would be lost. > to Annex E (where it originally was), "Guidance on Naming" (current Annex >E) back to Annex J, and "Changes from the previous version" (current >Annex J) back to Annex K. I will ask my co-editor (Nick Pope) to know what his opinion his before giving a definitive answer. BTW, my company will be closed tomorrow and thursday. I will meet Nick next monday. >After this change, the only differences left would be Sections 1, 2, >and 11 (where it might be OK). Section 10 (the empty IANA considerations > >section) will be removed by the RFC editor. > >Best regards, >Pasi Regards, Denis _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
