[rfc-i] Semantical question: are withdrawals/DNPs "published" ?

Alfred Hönes ah at TR-Sys.de
Wed Apr 7 12:52:03 PDT 2010


Looking at  <http://www.RFC-Editor.ORG/queue-stats/>  and the
older RFC Editor statistics, it looks like "DNPs/Withdrawals"
are getting counted in the monthly "Total published" (!) line.

However, since these drafts aren't published as RFCs, summing up
twelve of these figures into the annual publication rate becomes
problematic over time, mildly said.

It might add to clarity if an additional "Total DNPs/Withdrawals"
line could be added below the "Total published" line in the
statistics, to restore the balance.


Additionally, it is unclear how the Independent Submission
stream is dealt with in the statistics pages.
At best, in the future such drafts should be included into the
RFC Editor statistics when they are approved for publication
by the ISE and handed over to the Production Center (as is done
in a similar way for the other streams) and then be listed in
additional lines; currently it's not clear how these documents
are dealt with -- the recent figures neither match the former
expectation nor any other plausible assumptions; I assume for
sure that published Ind.Sub. documents simply are listed as
"[Informational and Experimental] Non Working Group".

Similarly, IMO the IAB and IRTF stream deserve their own lines
as well, for clarity.

Final question: Are documents aiming at BCP counted in the
statistics pages as "Standards Track" documents ?
(Assumption based on perceived mismatches for recent figures.)


Kind regards,
  Alfred.

-- 

+------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
| TR-Sys Alfred Hoenes   |  Alfred Hoenes   Dipl.-Math., Dipl.-Phys.  |
| Gerlinger Strasse 12   |  Phone: (+49)7156/9635-0, Fax: -18         |
| D-71254  Ditzingen     |  E-Mail:  ah at TR-Sys.de                     |
+------------------------+--------------------------------------------+



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list