[rfc-i] Substantial revision
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Mon May 28 09:04:37 PDT 2012
On 2012-05-28 18:01, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 2012-05-28 16:43, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 2012-05-28 17:38, Joe Touch wrote:
>>> New documents shouldn't be minor revisions of existing docs. They
>>> often need to be substantially revised in content anyway, structurally
>>> reorganized, etc.
>> Hmm. I don't think this is true for the case where we go from Draft to
>> Full Standard.
> That used to be true, but RFC 6410 removed that case.
> It seems obvious that system must allow for substantial revision
> by people other than the original authors.
Oh, I see (I tried to get it right but got it wrong anyway :-).
So what about the case where we go from *Proposed* to Full?
More information about the rfc-interest