Subject: [Cbor] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on charter-ietf-cbor-01-01: (with COMMENT)

From: Alvaro Retana via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 09:25:24 -0700

Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-cbor-01-01: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-cbor/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I have a couple of editorial suggestions:

(1) The charter talks about "using a DISPATCH like process".  While most people
might have an idea of what that is, I think mentioning it is not necessary.

(2) The first category is:

   General purpose specifications that are expected to have broad usage: The
   working group will normally adopt and publish such proposals. Examples of
   proposals in this category are CBOR Sequence media type
   (draft-bormann-cbor-sequence) and Error Indications tag
   (draft-richter-cbor-error-tag).

It would be nice if the examples of WG adoption were adopted documents.  I
think the description is enough -- let the WG decide if these are this type of
documents.

(3) Similarly, in the third category... "An example of this might be portions
of draft-bormann-cbor-tags-oid..."  The tentative language is not great, even
for an example.

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 17:55:36 +0100

> might have an idea of what that is, I think mentioning it is not necessary.

Would noting RFC 7957 help?

Barry

---

From: Alvaro Retana <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 13:03:31 -0400

Sure.

Thanks!

Alvaro.