Re: [hrpc] I-D Action: draft-irtf-hrpc-political-04.txt

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

Hi Avri,

I ask for guidance from the chair and from the RG as to what qualifies as ready for publication.  What are the criteria?  What are we aiming for?  Academic quality?

My view?   There are some real problems in the document.  This is not an exhaustive list:

The thesis statement conflicts with the introduction, and conflates protocols and standards.
As both protocols and standards are central to the document, you would think that they would be defined early on, like in the definitions section.
The difference between protocols and standards is not made, nor is equivalence.
There is no statement of import in the form of what real contribution the work is making and why that contribution matters.
The general and the specific are conflated.  Are protocols and standards at issue here or are we talking about IETF protocols and standards?
The lack of examples is really quite frustrating.

There are a great many other problems with the draft, not the least of which is that the author makes unsupported claims, either by reference or proof, one example being the discussion in Section 5 about the WTO.

Are these show stoppers?  Please before we continue, let’s understand our own standard for publication.

Eliot