Thanks for your review, Roni. Authors, have you observed these comments, and you have any response?
Jari On 20 Jan 2015, at 08:51, Roni Even <[email protected]> wrote: > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, > please see the FAQ at > <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. > > Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may > receive. > > Document: draft-ietf-drinks-spp-protocol-over-soap-07 > Reviewer: Roni Even > Review Date:2015–1-17 > IETF LC End Date: 2015–1-22 > IESG Telechat date: > > Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a standard track RFC. > > > Major issues: > > Minor issues: > > There are two schemas used, the sppf:base and sppf:soap each have a version > number. When talking about supported version and about response codes on > supported version, is it referring to the base or soap version? There is some > text in the minorVer section but it is not clear enough. > > > > > > > > Nits/editorial comments: > > The “complexType name="ResultCodeType” is defined in multiple subsections > (7.2.1.2 , 7.2.2.2 , …) but not in all places, should be specified only once > or in all. Also the definitions in section 7 are not consistent with the ones > in section 9 which is the formal definition. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
