ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IANA Considerations

2005-07-07 13:33:20
On Thu July 7 2005 15:32, Ned Freed wrote:

I have never suggested that the requirment for an IANA considerations 
section
in documents that contain IANA considerations be dropped.

The specific requirement is for the presence of a section in an I-D
presented for publication as an RFC even in the case that there are
no IANA actions.

Which would presumably mean that the idnits
check against that requirement would be dropped,

On the contrary, it is important that automated tools warn that such 
sections
are missing. This warning should not prevent a document from being last 
called,
however.

idnits generates a warning because there is a requirement for such a
section.  I don't think it is reasonable to expect that an automated
tool will be able to determine whether or not IANA actions would be
required; it is easy to determine whether or not a section is
present.

Which is all that should be done.

If the unconditional requirement for a section goes away,
I would expect the test to go away, or to at least require some
non-default option to be specified to enable it.  Otherwise it will
appear when there are in fact no IANA actions and then it will be
treated as noise, like the fabled boy who cried "wolf".

Then by all means only issue the warning when in "let's find out what
needs to be reviewed mode".

And that is precisely why several
people have been advocating the rule, namely that it prompts review of
the issue (whether or not a particular author/editor adheres to the rule).

I disagree. I think it will over time come to have exactly the opposite 
effect.

The only way to tell for sure is to let the experiment run its course.
 
Early indications are that it is already having the opposite effect.

Indeed, although BCP 18 (RFC 2277, Frank) recommends an 
internationalization
considerations section, many documents do not include one even where
internationalization is an issue.  If the IETF feels that
internationalization is an important issue, a similar guideline prompting
authors/editors to include, and reviewers to review such a section might
be worth adding.  That is another matter, as is whether or not a published
RFC should contain a null internationalization considerations section.

Sigh. More boilerplate BS, more unnecessary nonsense, more disincentives for
authors, less and lower quality review, and fewer and poorer documents.

Not boilerplate, a reminder for authors/editors to consider the issue, and
the remainder simply don't follow.

I disagree completely. And I believe that further disucssion of this
is pointless, so this will be my final note on the topic.

                                Ned

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>