Last Call Review of draft-wilde-json-seq-suffix-02
review-wilde-json-seq-suffix-02-genart-lc-yee-2016-12-10-00

Request Review of draft-wilde-json-seq-suffix
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 03)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2016-12-08
Requested 2016-11-11
Authors Erik Wilde
Draft last updated 2016-12-10
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -02 by Peter Yee (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -00 by Warren Kumari (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -01 by Al Morton (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Peter Yee
State Completed
Review review-wilde-json-seq-suffix-02-genart-lc-yee-2016-12-10
Reviewed rev. 02 (document currently at 03)
Review result Ready with Nits
Review completed: 2016-12-10

Review
review-wilde-json-seq-suffix-02-genart-lc-yee-2016-12-10

This draft is looking better than the first two.  It's in line with the other structured syntax suffix drafts.  The only comment I have is:

Page 4, IANA Considerations, Contact name: The description of that email address (art@ietf.org) is “Applications and Real-Time Area Discussion”, not "Applications and Real-Time Area Working Group".  It’s not a WG that I am aware of.  Did you want this to use this address or might you prefer appsawg?  APPSAWG is listed as the “ART Area General Applications Working Group”.  RFC 6839 references “Apps Area Working Group (apps-discuss@ietf.org)” in its IANA Considerations section, so I can see how you might have gotten to what you used, but I don't think that's correct.  Give some consideration to the right name and email address for this item and the Author/Change controller.