Document: draf-merrick-jms-uri-10
Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani
Review Date: Dec-06-2010
IETF LC End Date: Dec-28-2010
IESG Telechat date: Not known.

Summary: This draft is ready as an Informational.
Major issues: 0
Minor issues: 0
Nits/editorial comments: 3

*  S4 -- "The required particles in the JMS URI ...", here it may be
 better to stick with the nomenclature established by rfc5234 and
 parsing literature regarding "elements" and "terminals".  Under that
 nomenclature, "the scheme part ("jms") would be a terminal and the
 variant identifier and the <jms-dest> portions would be elements.

*  S4.2.2, S4.2.2.1 -- The long URI that spans multiple lines is
 presumably on one logical line when specified in a browser URL field or
 programmatically, right?  I do not know whether it is worth adding
 that distinction in your draft.  I will leave it to your discretion.

*  S4.4 -- I am not sure why the second paragraph starts with
 an underline character: _Warning_.  This will probably render using a
 different font, etc. on a browser, but in the printed page it will
 loose its meaning.  Maybe best to s/_Warning_/Warning/