[rfc-i] More-than-editorial changes in AUTH48
paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Thu Nov 19 09:57:19 PST 2009
At 8:38 AM -0800 11/19/09, Joe Touch wrote:
>If it's too late to make these changes as a group, then it's also
>inappropriate to consider them as AUTH48. They're not merely typographic
>or grammatical; they underly the discussion on which the consensus is based.
The IESG often purposely delays more-than-editorial document changes until AUTH48; why should the IAB be held to different standards?
Feel free to read the above with different tones of voice (resigned, sarcastic, imploring): they all apply. The transitional RSE or first actual RSE needs to deal with this issue in an open fashion. I am not proposing the Right Way here, just saying that the confusion in the community over this is significant and avoidable.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
More information about the rfc-interest