Adding a sentence making it clear it’s safe to skip the glossary if you’re 
going to read the rest of the document would address my approachability concern 
completely. :)

Sent from my iPhone

> On 10 Mar 2023, at 17:34, Gorry Fairhurst <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> On 10/03/2023 14:57, Brian Trammell (IETF) wrote:
>> hi Reese, all,
>> 
>> Apologies I haven’t been around on the answering-of-comments; it’s been a 
>> rough month. Thanks, all, for getting these revs of the documents out. I’ve 
>> reviewed the changes.
>> 
>> - Arch changes are good, modulo the following non-blocking comment:
>> 
>> I’m not convinced of the value of the glossary of terms, as it forwardrefs 
>> basically the entire document, and some of the definitions are so generic as 
>> to be potentially confusing (e.g. Event), so I think putting these up front 
>> reduces the document’s approachability and readability.  I understand that 
>> some people like these (and other standards orgs make them mandatory, hi 
>> ETSI), so I won’t fight it.
> 
> Mea cupla on this, and I did recall your thoughts when we discussed at one of 
> the TAPS interims. At first I didn't feel persauded, but as I tried to reset 
> my head to someone who had never read these IDs before, I began to think this 
> could be really valuable to give some initial context to the many terms we 
> use across the documents. The text is identical or "thinned" versions of 
> later text.
> 
> If this glossary is thought useful - which I now personally think it is, but 
> others are free to comment  - I'd be really quite OK with this "glossary" 
> starting with a sentence that says each of these terms is defined later in 
> the document, in other words - hinting strongly don't bother with this if you 
> know what you are reading....
> 
>> 
>> - Interface changes are good.
>> 
>> - Implementation changes are good.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> Brian
>> 
>>>> On 10 Mar 2023, at 01:26, Reese Enghardt <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear TAPS,
>>> 
>>> As you may have seen, our three documents were updated to address Zahed's 
>>> AD review comments (Thank you to everyone involved!).
>>> 
>>> Please note that there were normative language changes in the Interface 
>>> document.
>>> 
>>> If you have any questions about or any objections to these changes, please 
>>> respond to the list within the next two weeks, i.e., by Thursday March 
>>> 23rd, 5pm PT. (This is Thursday before IETF 116.)
>>> 
>>> If we don't hear anything by this date, we will assume that there is WG 
>>> consensus on these changes.
>>> 
>>> For your convenience, here are the diffs for all three documents:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-taps-arch-16
>>> 
>>> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-taps-interface-19
>>> 
>>> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-taps-impl-15
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> Reese
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 3/9/23 10:01, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
>>>> directories.
>>>> This Internet-Draft is a work item of the Transport Services WG of the 
>>>> IETF.
>>>> 
>>>>         Title           : An Abstract Application Layer Interface to 
>>>> Transport Services
>>>>         Authors         : Brian Trammell
>>>>                           Michael Welzl
>>>>                           Theresa Enghardt
>>>>                           Godred Fairhurst
>>>>                           Mirja Kuehlewind
>>>>                           Colin Perkins
>>>>                           Philipp S. Tiesel
>>>>                           Tommy Pauly
>>>>   Filename        : draft-ietf-taps-interface-19.txt
>>>>   Pages           : 91
>>>>   Date            : 2023-03-09
>>>> 
>>>> Abstract:
>>>>    This document describes an abstract application programming
>>>>    interface, API, to the transport layer that enables the selection of
>>>>    transport protocols and network paths dynamically at runtime.  This
>>>>    API enables faster deployment of new protocols and protocol features
>>>>    without requiring changes to the applications.  The specified API
>>>>    follows the Transport Services architecture by providing
>>>>    asynchronous, atomic transmission of messages.  It is intended to
>>>>    replace the BSD sockets API as the common interface to the transport
>>>>    layer, in an environment where endpoints could select from multiple
>>>>    interfaces and potential transport protocols.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-taps-interface/
>>>> 
>>>> There is also an HTML version available at:
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-taps-interface-19.html
>>>> 
>>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>>> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-taps-interface-19
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at 
>>>> rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Taps mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Taps mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
>> _______________________________________________
>> Taps mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Taps mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps

Reply via email to