• Revised I-D Needed - Issue raised by WG
  • Awaiting Expert Review/Resolution of Issues Raised
  • Awaiting External Review/Resolution of Issues Raised
  • Awaiting Merge with Other Document
  • Author or Editor Needed
  • Waiting for Referenced Document
  • Waiting for Referencing Document
  • Revised I-D Needed - Issue raised by WGLC
  • Revised I-D Needed - Issue raised by AD
  • Revised I-D Needed - Issue raised by IESG
  • Doc Shepherd Follow-up Underway
  • Other - see Comment Log

IETF :: speechsc

Current state: WG Document

Viewing the last 20 entries. Show full log.

2012-11-13 00:24 (System)

RFC published

2012-09-18 12:16 (System)

IANA Action state changed to RFC-Ed-Ack from Waiting on RFC Editor

2012-09-17 20:07 (System)

IANA Action state changed to Waiting on RFC Editor from Waiting on Authors

2012-09-14 11:49 (System)

IANA Action state changed to Waiting on Authors from In Progress

2012-09-14 09:54 (System)

IANA Action state changed to In Progress from Waiting on Authors

2012-09-12 15:52 (System)

IANA Action state changed to Waiting on Authors from In Progress

2012-09-06 07:50 Amy Vezza

State changed to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent

2012-09-04 14:45 (System)

IANA Action state changed to In Progress

2012-09-04 14:30 Amy Vezza

State changed to Approved-announcement sent from Approved-announcement to be sent

2012-09-04 14:30 Amy Vezza

IESG has approved the document

2012-09-04 14:30 Amy Vezza

Closed "Approve" ballot

2012-09-04 14:30 Amy Vezza

Ballot approval text was generated

2012-09-04 14:30 Amy Vezza

State changed to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup

2012-09-03 06:18 Sean Turner

[Ballot Position Update] Position for Sean Turner has been changed to No Objection from Discuss

2012-08-31 09:14 Pete Resnick

[Ballot comment]
Thanks for addressing the essential issues. I'll leave the remaining stuff here for the record.

I agree with Stephen (and likely everyone else) that this document is abominably long. It could have reasonably been broken up into multiple documents, which would have made readability much better. I have a sneaking suspicion that it will be impossible to implement a completely independent interoperable implementation just from this spec. I also have a sneaking suspicion that this will never advance beyond Proposed Standard. I understand that this document suffers from being the result of a long process, but incremental publication and experience (instead of dumping everything into a grand unified document the first time out of the gate) would have made for better output. Still, I'm not willing to stop the document at this point. The work seems important, and you need a record of what everyone is doing.

Section 9.6.3.4: It's too bad that you are using ISO 8601 instead of RFC 3339. A more limited set would be better.

ABNF. Overall, you should re-use elements whenever possible from other canonical texts if you can avoid re-inventing them for yourself. So:

Why use UTF8-NONASCII instead of the productions in RFC 3629 (UTF8-2 / UTF8-3 / UTF8-4)?

Is there nowhere to pull the URI definition from? Re-creating ABNF for this stuff seems fraught.

quoted-string doesn't seem to be needed in completion-reason; *UTFCHAR could have worked.

2012-08-31 09:14 Pete Resnick

[Ballot Position Update] Position for Pete Resnick has been changed to No Objection from Discuss

2012-08-30 11:30 Robert Sparks

[Ballot Position Update] Position for Robert Sparks has been changed to Yes from Discuss

2012-08-28 14:33 Stephen Farrell

[Ballot comment]
- This is abominably long;-)

2012-08-28 14:33 Stephen Farrell

[Ballot Position Update] Position for Stephen Farrell has been changed to No Objection from Discuss

2012-08-28 12:28 (System)

Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed

Viewing the last 20 entries. Show full log.