[rfc-i] [IAB] Headers and Boilerplates is done.
touch at ISI.EDU
Thu Nov 19 13:18:48 PST 2009
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Russ Housley wrote:
>> >> Let me rephrase:
>> >> My read of the original suggestion was that no consensus discussion
>> >> would occur - that this would be up to the authors/RFC Editor. Because
>> >> this is a substantive change, I disagree with that conclusion.
>> > WHAT is a substantive change? Adding the common abbreviations (e.g.,
>> > "IETF") to help outsiders to recognize the stream designation?s Adding
>> > the word "submission" to "Independent", which in fact brings it more
>> > into line with 4846? Calling these substantive would seem to me
>> > illogical, so I must assume you are referring to some other change as
>> > substantive. Please explain.
>> Adding the word "submission" to Independent, but not to IAB, IETF, or
>> other streams.
>> That may seem illogical to you, but it's inconsistent and the
>> inconsistency is substantive to me.
> RFC 4844 lists the four RFC streams, and it includes a section on each:
> 5.1.1. IETF Document Stream
> 5.1.2. IAB Document Stream
> 5.1.3. IRTF Document Stream
> 5.1.4. Independent Submission Stream
> I read Bob's suggestion as alignment with these names.
It's impressive that we've so well coordinated the misuse of the English
language. I defer to alignment with previous misuses.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the rfc-interest