[rfc-i] On Authors, Contributors, Editors, and overload.
Joel M. Halpern
jmh at joelhalpern.com
Thu Sep 29 21:16:51 PDT 2011
I hope that I am misunderstanding you Joe.
Otherwise, I would have to say that your description is missing an
important fact reflected both in our rules and our history.
Once a document is adopted by a working group as a working group
document, it does not belong to the author. If the chairs (with the
consent of the WG) deem that the WG is best served by a change in
authorship, then a different person is given the pen.
The earlier author must be properly credited. But they no longer own
In extreme cases, when an AD judges that the pen holder of a WG document
is not making the changes the WG requires, the AD is expected to work
with the chairs to cause a change of pen holder. This has happened in
the past with working group documents.
So, yes, the IETF does appoint the person doing the writing for WG
For non-WG documents, the IETF has no say.
On 9/28/2011 8:30 PM, Joe Touch wrote:
> On 9/28/2011 4:46 PM, SM wrote:
>> Hi Joe,
>> At 16:17 28-09-2011, Joe Touch wrote:
>>> For IETF stream:
>>> add author/editor is made by the individuals with the approval
>>> of the WG
>> Isn't that a WG Chair decision?
>> I am fine with it being done with the approval of the WG. There can be
>> situations when it is better not to have a WG discussion about
> I doubt a WG chair would make a decision that the WG didn't like, but I
> wasn't focusing on who "approves".
> My main point was that the IETF (Wg chair, WG - whatever) doesn't
> appoint (that is unilateral, and authors/editors can always decline);
> they "invite" or "approve", however you prefer to view it.
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
More information about the rfc-interest