[rfc-i] Notes on "submission format"

[Paul Hoffman]

On Sep 21, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Dave Crocker <dhc at dcrocker.net> wrote:

> 
>>    Submission format = the format submitted to the RFC Editor by
>>    authors.
>> 
>>       *  might not be the same as the canonical formats (though it would
>>          make the workflow somewhat simpler for the RFC Editor if it
>>          were);
>> 
>>       *  will be converted to another format for further processing and
>>          publication if necessary
>> 
>>       *  Currently: .txt (required), XML (optional), NROFF (optional)
>> =====
>> 
>> "Authors" do not submit to the RFC Editor: stream managers do.
> 
> 
> Strictly speaking, reference to the actor doing the submission is not needed; as demonstrated here, it's even distracting.
> 
> So, neutral language would work better, such as:
> 
>   = the format submitted to the RFC Editor for publication

I prefer to keep the "stream manager" in because some people in the earlier discussion conflated two different ideas: "the format I turn in Internet Drafts in my intended stream" and "the format the stream manager would turn in to the RFC Editor". It is plausible that if the submission format was X in the future, Stream Y might accept Internet Drafts in format X and Z, but would covert Z to X when they are ready to become RFCs.

--Paul Hoffman