Subject: [Ltru] draft-ietf-ltru-matching-02

From: Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 00:13:29 +0200

Hi, if Randy really wants to "last call" the matching draft
together with the registry draft it's time to find some nits:

- the references are still messy (2234 instead of 2234bis,
  normative IANA MoU, unreferenced [2], [3], [4], [6], [7],
  [8], [9], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], {18],
  [20] ).

- the credits are dubious, IIRC only Doug, Ira, Ned, John,
  and Randy contributed to the matching draft (and Ira isn't
  listed).

- chapter 5 is apparently a copy from the registry draft.
  A simple pointer "security considerations are discussed in
  [draft-ietf-ltru-registry]" is better.

- chapter 6 is apparently a copy from the registry draft, it
  could be deleted.  Probably this kills some more references.

- chapter 4 says "this is the first version of this document".
  But its draft -02, not -00.

- chapter 3 doesn't appear in the order recommended in draft
  rfc-editor-rfc2223bis-08 (Acknowledgements, Security, IANA).
  I've seen Bruce check this, and I got this "wrong" elsewhere.

- The "Abstract" contains references, but that's not allowed.
  The XML input is apparently invalid, for a nice validator
  see also <http://rtg.ietf.org/~fenner/ietf/xml2rfc-valid/>.
  No, I'm not joking, I discussed this on the xml2rfc list.

- For the author's addresses I'd add some corresponding URLs,
  e.g. <http://www.inter-locale.com/> - no idea for Mark, IBM
  URLs are in permanent flux...

  ...one hour later, <http://purl.net/net/cp> and queries like
  <http://purl.net/net/cp/858> work again.  Grmbl.

- The intro defines unused keywords REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT,
  and OPTIONAL.  Bruce checks this.

- chapter 2.1.1 mentions en-DE-boont, that's an odd example
  for matching.

- chapter 2.1.2 says *[ "-" extlang ]
  Bill's checker proposes *( "-" extlang )
  We want *3( "-" extlang )

  It also says ( "x" / "X" ) instead of "x".  Same problem in
  the registry draft, AFAIK ("x"/"X") should be "x", reported
  several times here.

Obscure ABNF issues => TILT, I don't look any further, bye.

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: "Mark Davis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 15:48:39 -0700

Huh? I would object to that. The matching document has had not nearly the
same review, nor has the same timetable in the charter.

‎Mark

---

From: Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 02:47:50 +0200

Mark Davis wrote:

> The matching document has had not nearly the same review,
> nor has the same timetable in the charter.

Randy mentioned it when we talked about the Paris timetable.

It needs some clean-up before it can survive Bruce's famous
reviews.  For the ABNF I just found a third potential issue:

   lang    = ( 2*8ALPHA *[ "-" extlang ] ) / "*"
   extlang = 3ALPHA / "*"

lng-exa-*-exc-Latn can't be what you really want, how about:

   lang    = ( 2*8ALPHA *3( "-" extlang )) / "*"
   extlang = 3ALPHA

Either "*" for the complete <lang>, or no "*" in this part.
Or do you want lng-exa-*-exc-Latn for matching ?  Bye, Frank

---

From: "Mark Davis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 17:53:09 -0700

Randy, the matching document has never had the same deadline as the registry
one; we need to concentrate on getting the registry done, and not get
distracted.

‎Mark

---

From: "John.Cowan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 21:31:21 -0400

> lng-exa-*-exc-Latn can't be what you really want, how about:

No, it isn't: we want * or lng-* or lng-exa-* or lng-exa-exb-*.

-- 
Long-short-short, long-short-short / Dactyls in dimeter,
Verse form with choriambs / (Masculine rhyme):  [email-masked]
One sentence (two stanzas) / Hexasyllabically   http://www.reutershealth.com
Challenges poets who / Don't have the time.     --robison who's at texas dot net

---

From: Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 04:34:25 +0200

John.Cowan wrote:
 
>> lng-exa-*-exc-Latn can't be what you really want
[...]
> No, it isn't: 
> we want * or lng-* or lng-exa-* or lng-exa-exb-*.

Okay, then let's try to fix it:

   lang    = ( 2*8ALPHA *3( "-" extlang ) ) / "*" /
             ( 2*8ALPHA *2( "-" extlang ) "-*" ) 
   extlang = 3ALPHA

=> "Bill's ABNF Parser  No errors during parsing."

------------------------------------------------------------
Mark, I've no fresh ideas for the registry draft, my issues 
with 831...833 are already posted here, please read and / or
answer these posts.  I don't find issues in the proper order
of priority, and of course I know that the registry draft is
more important.  So far only Peter and Randy commented, they
apparently agree that "something" is still odd in draft -04.

Doug apparently agreed that "frozen" Preferred-Values aren't
optimal, and he found various minor nits around this issue.

                      Bye, Frank