[rfc-i] Should RFC-7996-bis be an IETF document in an IETF WG?

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Tue Jan 28 12:10:24 PST 2020


On 28.01.2020 20:55, Doug Royer wrote:
> On 1/28/20 10:37 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>
>> -> <https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-svg-rfc-bis>
>
> As important as this is to IETF authors, should this be an IETF draft?
> In an IETF working group? The contents of SVG-RFC and how to make and
> edit drafts and RFC documents seems like a big deal that would be of
> interest to a broader audience.
>
> Unfortunately it will probably slow it down as that seems to be what
> happens. However this is the BIS version, so I would think a little more
> time to get it more right would be a great thing.
>
> I quick search of my ietf-announce list archive has no mention that
> 7996-bis exists. I searched for SVG and 7996. (My Thunderbird has over
> 4,000 of the last sent to the ietf-announce list).
>
> Maybe there is a good reason to do this work on non 'IETF' lists. If so,
> I would love to hear the reasons.
> ...

That's a question for the RSE, not me :-)

Best regards, Julian


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list