It seems like the more efficient approach would be to essentially have
two stages, where the authors first sign off on the result of
copy-editing, and then on whatever cosmetic changes are needed after
the final conversion.
It's worth mentioning that this is exactly how book publication
works.
Exactly right. So, the question is whether the IETF needs to use an operational
model that guarantees certain, high overhead, or whether we can enjoy a model
that permits us to move much of the grunt work out to the authors.
(Interestingly, we can have the second-stage copy-editing either way, but with
far more of the grunt work done by authors, for one of the models.)
The quality of the copy-editing that the rfc editor does is quite high. But it
also imposes a very high aggregate cost on the IETF. Do we *really* need to
spend that money, for that benefit?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
<http://bbiw.net>
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf