ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: draft naming was RE: anti-harassment procedures

2014-02-21 15:58:08
On 02/21/2014 04:51 PM, Dave Cridland wrote:
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 9:26 PM, Keith Moore <moore(_at_)network-heretics(_dot_)com <mailto:moore(_at_)network-heretics(_dot_)com>> wrote:

    Agree. We have too many piddly rules that serve little or no
    purpose already.    As long as neither the identifier nor the
    listed authors in the document are misleading, I don't see the
    need to impose further restrictions on them.


I feel very strongly, and furthermore I think it's perfectly self evident - the form of a draft name, and the number of authors, and - most especially - the way in which these authors are listed is of vital importance, and there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that I have something to say about it. It's key to note, as a matter of principle.
Silly me, I think the draft should be evaluated based on its content, rather than on who claims to have written it.

Keith