Here are the comments we received from the GGF editor (Greg Newby):
Sorry for my delay in responding. This document is now in 15-day GFSG comment period. After that, and any suggested changes, public comment is the next phase.
Here are some comments that you might want to incorporate in a further revision before public comment (you can do these immediately, or wait until after the GFSG comment period, in case there are other suggestions).
In the header: Consider whether all the people listed should be Authors or Editors. With such a large group, maybe you really only have one or two Editors, and the rest belong in a separate Contributor's section. Remember that Authors (or Editors) are expected to fully endorse the complete documenta, and to remain responsible/responsive for the document for the future.
The GGF full copyright & IP statement can be moved to the end, rather than the beginning (I think GFD-1 specifies this, but even if not, that seems to be current practice).
References: I would *much* rather see references to actual *documents*, not just Web sites. Web sites are transient (the sites today are not the same as yesterday or tomorrow). Documents (published by the same people doing the site) are, we hope, more permanent. The purpose of References is so that someone who reads your document in, say, a few years, will be able to recreate the foundations on which your standards are built, by reviewing the documents you cite in your references. Please revisit these, and add specific documents/standards whenever possible. For the others, Web sites should not be in the References, they should simply be mentioned inline in the text.
In the Appendices, you have some examples in blue, some with syntax highlighting, and some in black/grey. Any reason why these can't be consistent?
Overall, this document is clearly written and seems to be well-designed. Thanks very much for your work on it.
Good news is that it looks like we're now counting down to public
comment period at long last.
--- Jim
