At 18:34 03-06-2012, John C Klensin wrote:
I don't think that is a fair comparison. First of all, the Last
Call spawned the whole thread about colloquial language. I
don't have any way to know how many of those who participated in
that thread read all the way through the document and even less
way to guess how many people were enough turned off by it to
lose interest in the Last Call, maybe after having read the
document. Second and more important, my suggestion that we go
Fair enough. My guess was that the Last Call was not really a Last Call. :-)
in the direction of a web page or wiki spawned a separate thread
that is more about the philosophy of how to handle the document
rather than about the detailed content of the document itself.
Again, I have no idea how many people other than myself looked
through the document, decided that "publish as RFC?" was the
wrong question, and as the result of that decision, concluded
that my time was better spent on medium and editorial process
than on reporting specific document comments. So you don't know
to what extent I, or anyone else in the "making it a web page"
threads read the document through either.
At 18:14 03-06-2012, John C Klensin wrote:
Well, as long as the document is informational and an overview,
I think that can be accomplished as easily with a web page, an
editor who can be trusted to exercise a certain amount of good
sense (and whose intentions are trusted) and a process for
forcing a review if needed. The thing that bothers me about
trying to do this by RFC is that the entire community then
wastes a huge amount of time debating the choice and style of
words and relatively minor details, after which everyone runs
out of energy to make further changes for years (other than
posting I-Ds on which there are no real controls, even an appeal
process (not that I'd expect Paul to ignore input)). If we go
the web page and editor route, expect revisions only when real
problems are identified and otherwise do a review every year or
so, I think we can get a pretty good balance between the
slowness of the RFC-and-community-consensus process and the
difficulties of the Wiki one.
In 1994 it was mentioned that due to the nature of the document it
can become outdated quite quickly. The web page approach was
recommended. The EDU Team (
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/group/edu/wiki/EduCharter ) could be an
alternative to take on the task.