[rfc-i] Text no longer definitive (was Re: Proposed way forwards on backward compatibility with v2)

Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Tue Feb 18 16:06:14 PST 2014

On 19/02/2014 12:48, Nico Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Brian E Carpenter
> <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 19/02/2014 11:49, Nico Williams wrote:
>>> Who cares if some I-D author doesn't know this guideline?  Isn't this
>>> one of the reasons we have a publication process?
>> We have a review process that is far from watertight due to
>> the size and complexity of the IETF (not to mention the
>> other streams). So it matters that we don't have published
>> accessibility guidelines for authors, WG members, WG chairs,
>> ADs, and review teams to use.
> So we're in violent agreement.  RFC a11y should be a guideline, and it
> should be published with RFC-Editor buy-in.  WG chairs and IESG
> members should find out about via training.  Once that's done we can
> let the process take care of it: authors will find out whenever they
> find out.  If neither authors, editors, nor reviewers turn out to care
> and the guideline collects dust, that's fine (but I doubt it will turn
> out that way).
>> It definitely matters that authors are made aware of
>> the guidelines. The effort of fixing a document is far
>> greater and involves more people when a defect is found
>> late in the process.
> As long as the RFC-Editor is aware foremost, and then IESG members and
> WG chairs (and this is why we have training, no?) then that's good
> enough.  We can't expect *authors* to know everything.
> Your arguments (such as they are) come across as circular, that
> because X don't know about a guideline Y that we'd like to have, we
> can't have Y as a guideline.  That's just silly.

No, I didn't mean that. I mean that we should have such guidance
visible (dare I say accessible) and then it will trickle through
the system. And now is a very good moment to draft the guidance,
since non-ASCII will make it even more important.

Being both a Gen-ART reviewer and an EDU team member, I'll be
happy to help promulgate the guidance if someone can draft it.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list