On 9/3/2013 3:49 PM, Bradner, Scott wrote:
in line
On Sep 3, 2013, at 4:45 PM, Pete Resnick
<presnick(_at_)qti(_dot_)qualcomm(_dot_)com>
wrote:
at it - maybe you should remove the 2nd
paragraph in the same section
An official summary of standards actions completed and pending shall
appear in each issue of the Internet Society's newsletter. This
shall constitute the "publication of record" for Internet standards
actions.
should also be removed since that is not being done either
and it is not good to say we have a publication of record that
does not actually exist
I agree it should probably be removed. Should we replace it anything?
Maybe an informational statement that the current standards status is always
at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcxx00.html ? (Or whatever stable URL
the RFC Editor prefers to cite.)
I've fixed the reference to [STDS-TRK] so that it shows the URL. I'm not sure
we need to make further reference to it.
Thinking about this more, we're starting to drift afield of the purpose of this
document if we start removing that paragraph. Removing that paragraph requires
a different explanation than the rest. Speaking for myself only, I'm leaning
against dealing with it. Anyone want to speak strongly for or against?
I agree that the explanation is different, but I go back to Scott's "it
is not good to say we have a publication of record that does not
actually exist".
Not that Pete and I get paid by the document on telechat agendas, but is
this another candidate for a short draft?
Spencer