Telechat Review of draft-ietf-json-i-json-05

Request Review of draft-ietf-json-i-json
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 06)
Type Telechat Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2015-01-20
Requested 2015-01-15
Authors Tim Bray
Draft last updated 2015-01-19
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -05 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -05 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -05 by Tero Kivinen (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -05 by Jürgen Schönwälder (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Meral Shirazipour 
State Completed
Review review-ietf-json-i-json-05-genart-telechat-shirazipour-2015-01-19
Reviewed rev. 05 (document currently at 06)
Review result Ready with Nits
Review completed: 2015-01-19


I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at



Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive.


Document: draft-ietf-json-i-json-05

Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour

Review Date: 2015-01-14

IETF LC End Date:  2015-01-14

IESG Telechat date: NA




This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC but I have some comments .



Nits/editorial comments:

-Please spell out acronyms at first use. E.g. JSON, I-JSON


-[Page 3], "treat an integer", it would be good to mention this is still referring to IEEE754 format.


-[Page 3],"(one example would be 64-bit integers)", here not clear if still IEEE7544 is discussed or integer format. If latter, is it signed/unsigned.

"RECOMMENDED to encode them in JSON string values." should this be done in decimal format then?


-[Page 4], Section 3, "in the JSON messages it receives."--->"in the JSON messages they receives."


-[Page 4], "receiving implementation"---->"receiving implementations"


Best Regards,



Meral Shirazipour