Speaking as an individual who has also participated in the work of other
standards organizations - In other SDOs, the IEEE 802 for example,
suggesting a fix for a problem detected in the text at ballot time is
not only welcome, but sometimes the recommended if not mandatory
practice.
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On
Behalf Of Brian E Carpenter
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 12:58 AM
To: Joel M. Halpern
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Qualitative Analysis of IETF and IESG trends
(Re: Measuring IETF and IESG trends)
On 2008-07-02 09:07, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
Of course, we also get complaints whenever anyone raises an issue
without providing text. So, by a strict reading of the
argument, the
AD is hanged if he provides text (directing the working group) and
hanged if he does not provide text (you didn't make clear what your
problem is, and how to fix it.)
There is, I think a big difference between an AD writing
(a) "Here is the fix for my problem"
and
(b) "Here is my proposal for one way to fix this issue; there
may of course be other ways to do so, so please let me know
what the WG prefers to do."
But that takes time to type in, and an overloaded AD (or
reviewer) will be very tempted just to write "Suggested fix:".
Maybe we should assign specific (b) semantics to SUGGESTION
and use that as shorthand?
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf