[rfc-i] finding the union of multiple documents (was Re: Problem with new Note Well)

George, Wes wesley.george at twcable.com
Mon Jan 27 13:50:07 PST 2014


On 1/27/14, 12:20 PM, "Dave Crocker" <dhc at dcrocker.net> wrote:
>
>      5.  Expecting an average IETF engineer to consult 4 different
>BCPs, in order to understand what is required of them is not reasonable.
>  Nor is all each document relevant.  So, in effect, the references are
>overly broad, as well as too complicated. (See point 6.)
>
><snip>
>      3.  We need all of the IPR rules for IETF participation to be in a
>single, simple, clear document that is easily understandable by an
>average engineer. (See point 1.)

Why should IETF engineers get special treatment over anyone trying to
implement an IETF standard? This is a much larger problem that exists for
many of IETF’s documents that have been partially updated by subsequent
documents rather than completely replaced/obsoleted by a BIS version.
Trying to follow the updates/replaces chain on some sets of documents to
figure out what you’re actually supposed to implement can be quite
frustrating. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a modular document management
system that was capable of using metadata to take an original document,
the identified set of changes from one or more subsequent “updating”
documents, and synthesizing a new document that has all of the info in one
place?
Seems a worthwhile problem to try to solve, especially as the series ages.
I bet we could do it even if we had to keep the existing LPR-friendly
all-text format. ;-)

Wes George

Anything below this line has been added by my company’s mail server, I
have no control over it.
-----------


This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list