On 27-Nov-2007, at 12:16, Marshall Rose wrote:
agreed. at the risk of stating the obvious: the problem is identical
to the one where the authors submit nroff source to the rfc-editor.
it's always a good idea to run the toolchain, and then diff the text
against the I-D approved by the IESG. if there's a difference, the
relevant ADs and authors need to get on the same page.
And all of this, incidentally, is what the RFC Editor and ADs do...
ok, so the current process is adequate, we just need to be a little
more careful in following it, right?
That's how it looked to me. (I was the author who stupidly attached
the wrong piece of XML in response to the RFC editor's request for XML
at the start of AUTH48, for which I partly apologise, and partly take
a bow for exposing opportunities to improve the workflow :-)
Joe
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf