[rfc-i] Decisions about non-technical content of RFCs

Paul Hoffman paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Sat Nov 13 14:24:48 PST 2010


At 2:05 PM -0800 11/13/10, Joe Touch wrote:
>On 11/13/2010 1:32 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>>At 6:51 AM -0800 11/13/10, Joe Touch wrote:
>>>On 11/13/2010 2:38 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>>>>Greetings again. The current draft says:
>>>>
>>>>    Final decisions about the technical content of individual documents
>>>>    are the exclusive responsibility of corresponding stream approvers.
>>>>
>>>>That is hopefully non-controversial. However, it does not cover the non-technical content of RFCs. For example, without the consent of the corresponding stream approver:
>>>>
>>>>- can the RFC Editor remove an author's name which was on the Internet Draft when publishing an RFC?
>>>>
>>>>- can the RFC Editor change the contents of the Acknowledgements section?
>>>>
>>>>- can the RFC Editor make the ASCII art prettier?
>>>
>>>And can the author have the right to withdraw a draft from publication if they disagree with any of these?
>>>
>>>I.e., the RFC Editor has some rights, but let's also include the author's rights in this process.
>>
>>It is an interesting question, but I'm not sure that belongs in this
>>document, but instead in the procedures manual. The questions above
>>relate specifically to what the RSE is and is not allowed to do in their
>>job.
>
>Whatever doc the editor's rights are, that's where the author's rights need to be. I don't much care what doc that's in.

We disagree. This document is about the RSE's rights and responsibilities. Or are you saying that you would be fine with removing the text about the RSE not making technical changes from this doc and putting it in the procedures doc?

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list