Subject: [Sedate] Lars Eggert's No Objection on charter-ietf-sedate-00-00: (with COMMENT)

From: Lars Eggert via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 04:50:43 -0700

Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-sedate-00-00: 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-sedate/

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

All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to
address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by
automated tools, so there will likely be some false positives. There is no need
to let me know what you did with these suggestions.

"RFC3339", paragraph 1, nit:
- in UTC or in a local time along with the offset against UTC, however datetime
-                                                            ^ ^
+ in UTC or in a local time, along with the offset against UTC. However, datetime
+                          +                                  ^ ^      +

"RFC3339", paragraph 1, nit:
- interval, recurrence, or offset calculations, it's necessary to know the
-                                                 ^
+ interval, recurrence, or offset calculations, it is necessary to know the
+                                                 ^^

"I", paragraph 1, nit:
- It is valuable to have a serialisation format which retains this context and
-                                               ^ ^^^
+ It is valuable to have a serialisation format that retains this context and
+                                               ^ ^^

"I", paragraph 1, nit:
- via intermediate systems which only need to know about the instant in time.
-                          ^ ^^^
+ via intermediate systems that only need to know about the instant in time.
+                          ^ ^^

"T", paragraph 1, nit:
- The TC39 working group at ECMA have developed a format which is a good basis
-                                                        ^ ^^^
+ The TC39 working group at ECMA have developed a format that is a good basis
+                                                        ^ ^^

"I", paragraph 1, nit:
- It is anticipated that this document would be a companion to RFC3339 rather

"I", paragraph 1, nit:
- than a replacement, embedding an un-altered RFC3339 instant along with the
-                                    -                             ---------
- contextual data.
+ RFC3339 rather than a replacement, embedding an unaltered RFC3339 instant along
+ +++++++++++++++
+ with contextual data.
+ +++++

"I", paragraph 1, nit:
- It is also within scope for this group to consider a minor update to RFC3339 to
-                                                                     -----------
- allow larger than 4 digit signed years, to enable representing times further
-                   ^^                                          --------------
- into the past and future.
+ It is also within scope for this working group to consider a minor update to
+                                 ++++++++
+ RFC3339 to allow larger than four-digit signed years, to enable representing
+ +++++++++++                  ^^^^^
+ times further into the past and future.
+ ++++++++++++++