just to be thorough, let's explore a non-trivial matter of effort.
To write a complete specification can be an enormous effort. Having
contenders always have to write complete specifications, before there is a
choice among them, is wasteful. Sometimes necessary, but not always.
We need some sort of intermediate (or partial) "specification" which
provides enough detail for making choice among approaches, but does not
require a complete effort.
Perhaps things like introduction and architecture, along with a proposed
rest of the table of contents, and maybe some samples?
At 06:29 PM 1/3/01 -0500, Scott Brim wrote:
On 3 Jan 2001 at 16:08 -0600, Pete Resnick apparently wrote:
> If you can't write your proposal down in an I-D
> effectively, then it's not going to go into an RFC effectively and we
> might as well not waste face-to-face meeting time on the proposal at
Agree completely. That's when you find a co-editor. The ultimate goal
is not powerpoint.
Dave Crocker <dcrocker(_at_)brandenburg(_dot_)com>
Brandenburg Consulting <www.brandenburg.com>
Tel: +1.408.246.8253, Fax: +1.408.273.6464