Thank you, Jim. I have prepared a new version already and ready to do another update to address your points. If that doesn’t break the process.
Please see my comments inline. > On 18. Jun 2021, at 22:14, James Galvin <[email protected]> wrote: > > As document shepherd I have reviewed: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-epp-registry-maintenance-14 > > and provided a shepherd writeup so it can be submitted to the IESG for > publication. > > However, I note the following three editorial nits that the authors should > correct before submission to the IESG. > > > 1. The document has a normative reference to an internet-draft that has been > recently published as an RFC: > > draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces -> RFC9038 > TS: Changed. > > 2. In this paragraph, Section 1.1: > > XML is case sensitive. Unless stated otherwise, XML specifications > moreover, examples provided in this document MUST be interpreted in > the character case presented to develop a conforming implementation. > > Change “specifications” to “specification”. Drop “moreover,”. > TS: According to other RFCs, such as RFC9038, it says “Unless stated otherwise, XML specifications and examples provided …” Would you be fine with changing it like that? > > 3. In this paragraph, Section 1.1: > > In examples, "C:" represents lines sent by a protocol client and > "S:" represents lines returned by a protocol server. Indentation and > white space in examples are provided only to illustrate element > relationships and are not a REQUIRED feature of this protocol. > > Downcase the use of “REQUIRED”. TS: Changed. > > > With those changes I would recommend to Antoin Verschuren as the responsible > Chair for this document to submit the next version to the IESG for > publication. > > Jim _______________________________________________ regext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
