Subject: [Enum] review of draft-ietf-enum-calendar-service-00.txt

From: Alexander Mayrhofer <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 15:07:45 +0200

Hi,

this seems to be very straightfoward to me - my NITS:

- an "Introduction" section is missing - that's required according to the
ID-checklist. The "Discussion" section could simply be renamed.

- Small formatting issue: The notation of URI schemes is somewhat
inconsistent. In the Abstract as well as the Enumservice registration
template, the ':' is included, where the text in section 2 and 3 does
contain URI schemes without it. Interpreting the ABNF in RFC3986, the colon
is actually not included in the "scheme" - otoh, most recent Enumservice
registrations had schemes including the colon in the template. My personal
preference would be to add the colon to all occurences of URI schemes in the
text. comments? [note: should be pointed out in enumservice-guide]

- Please correct the registration template: The "service name" should not
include the DDDS application identifier, but just state "iCal", and the
lines for type/subtype are missing. So, that would be

Enumservice Name: "iCal"
Enumservice Type: "ical"
Enumservice Subtype: n/a
...

- Line spacing in the Enumservice template: Recent registrations had the
template lines as well as the whole template seperated by a blank line (as
in the original template in RFC3761) - please add them so that the
registration stands out a bit from the text.

that's all - good work!

cheers

Alex

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