On Jun 20, 2012, at 8:39 AM, SM wrote:
RFC 4844 discusses about RFC Series and the streams used by the various
communities to publish a RFC. One of those streams is for IETF Documents.
In the I-D being discussed, the document will be published on a web page.
The IESG will choose Paul Hoffman as the editor. I gather that those details
are not a problem.
Errr, maybe. The IESG could easily choose someone else; many individuals in
this community would be fine at being the Tao editor. Remember, I was the third
editor of the document.
draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02 mentions that the changes will be discussed
on an open, Tao-specific mailing list. The second paragraph of Section 2 and
the third paragraph are not so clear about changes, i.e. the editor accepts
proposed changes and the IESG accepts proposed changes.
Can you say what was "not so clear"? I absolutely want that bit to be clear.
Proposed text is appreciated here.
BTW, RFC 4677 should be moved to Historic instead of Obsolete.
Earlier versions of the Tao were made obsolete, not moved to Historic, so I
thought it was most appropriate to do that here as well. FWIW, the definition
of "Historic" in RFC 2026 is for specifications, not descriptive documents like
the Tao.
--Paul Hoffman