Re: Issues around sponsoring individual documents

[Lars Eggert <[e-mail]>]

On 2007-9-9, at 18:56, ext Dave Crocker wrote:
> Martin Duerst wrote:
>> As for the Atom-related drafts that James was working on,
>> I think that's one situation where I could understand if the AD
>> just told the author and the WG: Please make this a WG draft.
>
> It is common for "related" drafts to be outside the scope of the wg  
> charter. The AD cannot simply instruct the wg to go beyond that  
> scope.  So it is not uncommon for an informal wg task to be pursued  
> formally as an individual submission.

The AD actually can, if the WG is interested, because the charter is  
negotiated between the AD and the WG, followed by an IESG approval.

(If the WG - i.e., the expert community around a protocol - is not  
interested in a document, that should indicate that further questions  
may need to be asked about it before it should become an IS.)

>> Creating a WG is a huge overhead, but having a WG being
>> formally responsible for a draft that they discuss anyway
>> isn't too much overhead. Just an idea.
>
> Given the need to modify the charter, it actually is very high  
> overhead.

Not really. Minor recharterings to add well-defined work items aren't  
complicated.

Lars