[rfc-i] Substantial revision

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Mon May 28 10:16:18 PDT 2012

On 2012-05-28 19:09, Joe Touch wrote:
> On May 28, 2012, at 9:01 AM, Brian E Carpenter<brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>  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.
> The 'system' does just like for research pubs - write the new doc from material from any output format.  Source isn't needed got that at all.

It's not needed. It's just immensely convenient if you want to make sure 
that you don't change more than you intended to change. (Think change 

Best regards, Julian

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list