A Media Type for Reputation Interchange
RFC 7071
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 12 and is now closed.
(Barry Leiba; former steering group member) (was Discuss) Yes
Thanks for the excellent work in resolving the remaining issues.
(Pete Resnick; former steering group member) Yes
(Adrian Farrel; former steering group member) No Objection
(Benoît Claise; former steering group member) No Objection
(Brian Haberman; former steering group member) No Objection
(Gonzalo Camarillo; former steering group member) No Objection
(Jari Arkko; former steering group member) No Objection
(Joel Jaeggli; former steering group member) No Objection
(Martin Stiemerling; former steering group member) No Objection
(Richard Barnes; former steering group member) No Objection
And the antiparticle of the reputon is... a disreputon? It seems strange that the context for the reputon is relegated to a parameter of the media type, when it's really a semantic attribute, not a type/encoding attribute. Suggest moving it inside the reputon or reputon collection structures. In "sample-size": JSON doesn't have a notion of the length of an integer, so saying "64-bit" here seems odd, unless you mean that it MUST NOT exceed 2**64-1. I agree with Barry's comment that a collection of reputons (repu-meson?) should be an array rather than an object.
(Sean Turner; former steering group member) No Objection
(Spencer Dawkins; former steering group member) No Objection
(Stephen Farrell; former steering group member) No Objection
(Stewart Bryant; former steering group member) No Objection
(Ted Lemon; former steering group member) No Objection
If I am reading this ABNF correctly:
reputon = "{" [ reputon-object
*(value-separator reputon-object) ] "}"
reputon-object = "reputon" name-separator response-set
...then a reputon is one or more reputon objects, each of which is denoted with the string "reputon". IOW:
{ "reputon": { ... }, "reputon": {...} }
Is that correct? If so, isn't a little weird to use "reputon" as the string that denotes a reputon object, which is a _part_ of a reputon, not a whole reputon? Or am I just not understanding the ABNF (which is quite possible—I'm hardly an expert).
The relationship between the term "clutch hitter" and "choke" is not going to be obvious to many readers (e.g., not obvious to me). This may not be the best example to use to make the point you are making here.
Are assertions not allowed to contain whitespace characters? I ask because you use names like "choke-hitter" and "is-good" instead of "choke hitter" and "is good". Given that these appear in quotes, it seems unnecessary to substitute dashes for spaces.