Skip to main content

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

Request Review of draft-ietf-json-i-json
Requested revision 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
I-D 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 Snapshot
Review review-ietf-json-i-json-05-genart-telechat-shirazipour-2015-01-19
Reviewed revision 05 (document currently at 06)
Result Ready with Nits
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

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