Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
the Web site design is from a much earlier era when people
accessed the web from 14K dial up and web site designers were
taught to only put five navigation options per web page.
My V.90 is not much better than 14K, and a Web design allowing
access with poor bandwidth is still perfection, also known as
"do as amazon does". The rfc-editor pages are generally fine.
There are of course ways to improve things, e.g. if I see an
interesting I-D I'd like to know where to send public comments
without "subscription" hurdles, and I'd like a way to track
its way through the iETF independent of minor changes like a
new document name (i.e. something like a PURL), etc.
the RFC-Editor Queue information is really tracking the
status of internet drafts, not RFCs.
It's only the POV of the rfc-editor, the IESG has its own POV.
They are different, where's the problem with this ? Merging
these state diagrams could be a dubious move, they are already
very convoluted.
I've never found out who or what "deadir" is, and I've no idea
who added a known to be harmful "RfC editor note" to a draft
I'm interested in. Maybe it's a bug in this tracker business.
Bye, Frank
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf