I agree that the adoption process/practice needs to solve that issue you
pointed out for. The way WG adopts may need some suggestions.
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Brian E Carpenter <
brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
Is it useful for authors of a draft to send messages saying things
like "I support the adoption of this draft as a WG document." ?
I think it is not useful, because it could encourage no comments. The focus
should be on non author's opinion, as they should answer the question is
the work ready/acceptable for adoption?
I'm not asking whether it's right or wrong, just whether such
a message helps the WG Chairs in evaluating consensus.
I agree. I understand that signals of authors announcing their adoption as
saying '' come on WG let us adopt and discuss later any changes'', they
should include writing in those threads ''please discuss if there are any
comments''. I think authors' announcement does not help me think nor
discuss with the WG. Specially it does not help me discuss with them
because they already announced as adopted. Not all authors like to discuss
their work, they may prefer WG adoption so they can move on.
(I see similar messages from non-authors, and I am definitely
doubtful about them unless they start with something like "I have
read this draft and...".)
Adoptions need to be discussed within meetings and list (both are
important) and evaluated. I agree that there is less quality in readings of
the majority of WG participants, many chairs do ask us to read all drafts,
but I hope we get more time or discussions.
AB