[rfc-i] Some questions about the RFC Editor restructuring plan
Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Thu Aug 7 14:26:20 PDT 2008
On 2008-08-07 22:20, Olaf Kolkman wrote:
> 1. The Independent Stream Approver job title
> The Independent Stream Approver is an unattractive name for the
> function. It sounds like an accountant/auditing function not as the
> "Chief Editor" of a important and relevant publication stream.
> Personally I think that this is a fair point. Suggestions for another
> title that is more attractive are welcome.
I was certainly one of the people who said this, so I'd better make
a suggestion. Since we need "RFC Editor" for the overall function,
how about "RFC Reviewing Editor [for the Independent Stream]" where
the part in brackets is only used when clarification is needed.
(Which makes me wonder whether the "RFC Editor" job title in the
new proposal should be "RFC Managing Editor".)
This relates to:
On 2008-08-08 00:33, Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
> It is not clear whether the discussion is based on experience in the
> technical and scientific publishing world, or if the rough
> correspondence is an accident.
IMHO there is only a partial correspondence, because an independent
peer review process is needed only for the Independent Stream. So I
think there is a strong analogy between the "RFC Reviewing Editor"
and an academic editor-in-chief, and between the RFC "Editorial Review
Board" [RFC4846] and an academic editorial board, *but* the analogies
only apply to the Independent Stream.
More information about the rfc-interest