Original text:
associated with it.  A track name identifies an individual track within the namespace. <del> A tuple of a track name and a track namespace together is known as a full track name: </del> A MOQT scope is a set of servers (as identified by their connection <del> URIs) for which full track names are guaranteed to be unique.  This implies that within a single MOQT scope, subscribing to the same full track name would result in the subscriber receiving the data for the same track.  It is up to the application using MOQT to define how broad or narrow the scope has to be.  An application that deals with connections between devices on a local network may limit the scope to a single connection; by contrast, an application that uses multiple CDNs to serve media may require the scope to include all of those CDNs. The full track name is the only piece of information that is used to identify the track within a given MOQT scope and is used as cache key.  MOQT does not provide any in-band content negotiation methods similar to the ones defined by HTTP (RFC9110); if, at a given moment in time, two tracks within the same scope contain different data, they have to have different full track names. </del>  In this specification, both the Track Namespace and the Track Name are not constrained to a specific encoding.  They carry a sequence of

Reviewer comments:
It's only used a few times and now that Namespace and Name are an opaque sequence of bytes, it's even less compelling.
Take the line from your drafts that says There is no valid way to parse the right hand of this. We have things like "Full Track Name Length" and "Full Track Name". I do not think we should have ambiguous syntax for things that require precision. I think it would also be good to have things that can be directly mapped to common programming languages. This moves beyound simply editorial, or specification is underspecified and ambiguous until we fix this.
One possible solution would be use underscore or CamelCase
Oh, and the longer we leave this dumpster fire, the more painful it will be to fix.
love it

Revised text:
associated with it.  A track name identifies an individual track within the namespace.  A MOQT scope is a set of servers (as identified by their connection  <ins> URIs) for which the tuple of Track Name and Track Namespace are guaranteed to be unique and identify a specific track.  It is up to the application using MOQT to define how broad or narrow the scope is.  An application that deals with connections between devices on a local network may limit the scope to a single connection; by contrast, an application that uses multiple CDNs to serve media may require the scope to include all of those CDNs. Because the tuple of Track Namespace and Track Name are unique within an MOQT scope, they can be used as a cache key.  MOQT does not provide any in-band content negotiation methods similar to the ones defined by HTTP (RFC9110); if, at a given moment in time, two tracks within the same scope contain different data, they have to have different names and/or namespaces. </ins> In this specification, both the Track Namespace and the Track Name are not constrained to a specific encoding.  They carry a sequence of