Web Linking
draft-nottingham-rfc5988bis-08

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 07 and is now closed.

Alexey Melnikov Yes

Adam Roach (was Discuss) Yes

Comment (2017-08-14)
Thanks for addressing my discuss.

Alia Atlas No Objection

Deborah Brungard No Objection

Ben Campbell No Objection

Comment (2017-08-02 for -07)
- Since this seems to be the week for this recurring controversy: I agree with Mirja that the abstract should mention that this obsoletes 5988.

2.1.1.1 and 2.1.1.2 seem to entirely contain IANA considerations. It seems a bit strange to specify them here and reference them from the IANA section. (I can accept this as a stylistic choice, but it creates additional work for anyone who came to this  draft primarily to learn the IANA bits.)

- 2.1.1.1: "The expert(s) MAY define additional fields to be collected in the
registry."
How should they go about doing that?

- 2.1.1.2: It seems like a mild abuse of the spirit of 2119 to put MUST and SHOULD requirements on the designated experts.

Spencer Dawkins No Objection

Suresh Krishnan No Objection

Warren Kumari No Objection

Comment (2017-08-01 for -07)
ART and others are more qualified to make useful determinations here, so I'll restrict myself to nits. :-P

1: The Note to Readers should have an "RFC Editor, please remove" tag.

2: Section 2: " A link can be viewed as a statement of the form "_link context_ has a  _link relation type_ resource at _link target_, which has _targetattributes_". If possible, it would be really helpful to have an example here - this may be clear to those schooled in the arts, but I found this hard to parse, and required much flipping back and forth to understand.

Mirja Kühlewind No Objection

Comment (2017-07-28 for -07)
Processing comments:
- The abstract should say that this document obsoletes RFC5988
- I don’t think we need to keep the pre-5378 disclaimer given Mark the only author of rfc5988 as well

Terry Manderson No Objection

Kathleen Moriarty No Objection

Comment (2017-08-02 for -07)
It would be good to include a reference to RFC7525 in the security considerations section when talking about using TLS.

Thanks.

Eric Rescorla (was Discuss) No Objection