Subject: draft-ruoska-encoding-00.txt

From: Bill McQuillan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 18:37:35 -0800

Since there is no author email address in the draft, I'm sending
this to the IETF Discussion list.

Issues:

Section 2.1:
"integer idenfier" -> "integer identifier"

Section 2.1, para 2:
"Implemenations" ->"Implementations"

Section 3.1, 3rd from last para:
"These bits determines" -> "These bits determine"

Section 3.2.3, para 2:
"sub braches but braches" -> "sub branches but branches"

Section 3.2.3, para 3:
"orginal" -> "original"

Section 3.3.2:
This section should mention the format for negative numbers (2's
comp, 1's comp, signed magnitude,...)

Section 4:
No values are given for designating the 4 types of Identifier.

Section 3.4:
Definition of Extended Frame does not allow an Identifier for
*any* new data type frame. Is this reasonable?

Section 4.2, para 2:

>   Integer identifiers are used to make document less resource hungry.
                                         ^--the
>   They are very efficient from resource point of view when compared to
                                 ^--a
>   string idenfiers.  Downside is that they make debugging a bit more
               ^--ti   ^--The 
>   complicated.  People are not good in remembering semantics bind to
                                      at                       bound
>   plain numbers so debugging tools maid need access to a look at table
                                     may                   lookup
>   to convert integer idenfiers to more human friendly strings.
                           ^--ti

Section 4.3:
Ascii art diagram split across page break.

Section 5, para 2:
"Implemenations" -> "Implementations"

Section 5.1, last para:
"String indentifier" -> "String identifier"

Section 7, para 1:
"Implemenations" -> "Implementations"

Section "Author's Address":
No email address given for Jukka-Pekka Makela.

-- 
Bill McQuillan <[email-masked]>