Re: Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draf t-ietf-mboned-driad-amt-discovery-09: (with COMMENT)

Hi Jake,

Thanks for your updates. I think your proposed structure below looks good and I believe it would be an improvement, however, you really need to take the decision here and double-check if the information flow still works well!

Mirja



> On 19. Dec 2019, at 00:27, Holland, Jake <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi everyone, and thanks for all the reviews and comments.
> 
> I just posted -11:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mboned-driad-amt-discovery-11
> 
> I believe it contains all the proposed edits I've accepted in the recent
> threads, with one outstanding exception remaining, regarding the comment
> from Mirja and my response (below).
> 
> This change seems to me like a fairly major editorial restructuring, and
> it wasn't exactly the suggested change, so I wanted to ask for confirmation
> on whether it seems like an improvement?  (And also whether anyone agrees
> or disagrees with me that it seems better than swapping the 3. Examples
> section wholesale with the current section 2?)
> 
> Aside from this pending change, I believe the -11 version incorporates all
> the changes I've made in response to the many excellent reviews and comments
> over the last several days.  Thanks everyone, and please let me know if
> you notice anything that might be missing, or of course if there are further
> comments (I think not everyone has had a chance to confirm yet whether the
> changes addressed all their concerns.)
> 
> Best regards,
> Jake
> 
> 
> <outstanding-proposed-edit>
>> 4) Editorial: I would recommend to have the examples (section 3) before section
>> 2.
> 
> I think moving the section is a little tricky.  I'm not sure the examples
> make much sense without the context established in sections 2.1 and
> 2.2, but I can see why it might make sense to break up section 2 between
> 2.2 and 2.3, and to put the examples section in-between, and now that you
> mention it, might improve the document.
> 
> What do you think of this structure?
> 
> Section 2 title "Relay Discovery Operation" -> "Relay Discovery Overview"
> Section 2.1 title "Overview" -> "Basic Mechanics"
> Section 3 "Examples" moved to section 2.3
> Section 2 end after new section 2.3 (previously Section 3 examples)
> 
> New section 3 titled "Relay Discovery Overview"
> Section 2.3 onward becomes new section 3.1
> 
> Do you think that would be a worthwhile reordering?  Do you think it would
> need any other changes?
> 
> I can see that having the examples before the more detailed sections about
> relay discovery operation might improve the doc for those reading it in
> order, I think that's a good point.  Thanks.
> </outstanding-proposed-edit>
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
MBONED mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned