[rfc-i] REOC membership
bob.hinden at gmail.com
Wed Jan 26 08:55:36 PST 2011
> I was going to say "it doesn't really matter", especially because we have adopted a strategy
> of figuring out various details, and only when we've nailed down all those details do we slap
> a label on them.
> However, on reflection, using REOC seems somewhat less error-prone.
> If we call it RSOC, somewhere, sometime, some folks are going to think that means
> "RSE Oversight Committee" (as in: RFC Series Editor Oversight Committee) only to find out
> quite some time later that they've got the entire scope wrong; a real disservice to the required
> breadth of the oversight function -- and far too much focus strictly on the RSE, which would be
> counterproductive as well.
I don't have a strong opinion, both will work. I do note that people will tend to forget what the acronym means and focus on what the group actually does over time. So I don't think any harm will be done.
RSOC is easier to say, while REOC will tend to get spelled out. I suppose someone might think RSOC means the RFC Society :-)
> So, REOC seems the safer, less error-prone label. (I've tried to find similar sorts of mis-
> interpretations of REOC, but have yet to find one.)
> Also, I'm reminded that we rarely refer to the "RFC Series", except in a few rather formal
> references. In practicse, we refer to the "RFC Editor". So REOC is a bit more in line with
>> Olaf M. Kolkman NLnet Labs
>> Science Park 140,
>> http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/ 1098 XG Amsterdam
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
More information about the rfc-interest