Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.txt> (Publishing the "Tao of the IETF" as a Web Page) to Informational RFC
Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> Fri, 06 July 2012 05:16 UTC
Return-Path: <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B97821F87E4; Thu, 5 Jul 2012 22:16:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.464
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.464 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.135, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jFsyVLxbkmfX; Thu, 5 Jul 2012 22:16:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vc0-f172.google.com (mail-vc0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0095921F87E0; Thu, 5 Jul 2012 22:16:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vcqp1 with SMTP id p1so6446284vcq.31 for <multiple recipients>; Thu, 05 Jul 2012 22:16:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=YycPJoQrjLEA8iAGzexnxeHUbLPX3CHokplDnvM2/cE=; b=xf9v0ur7ilUB4SUH0Z4LWSXJSqTHSriDX2B97JZE9SpmDhSZzDNLzcPmxsGy7Pe82Q ANxCBlg/dk4V3ZFP2bTJQCQZqfvwJ+r8rStfnDfaGITmp0vGhBufLP3H/jtfh+QXbnGO XpM7aQ4VURhGr2nGsSFDAYQuO98eedKhaztLi8T8kCHQHFEH5YXRBNz7w9PpftwlAkTY +s+NGvLFHVYOeXHWKXPc5Q0AXz2t+7vGjBm3CnSVSo2gVVT1NKWtPDsELxqqp3BEjVB7 CIFMnuPTNGmE5VOimr+nC+owOjjI0sBu2nx4zrNjbdq5pui1YEaRTnNwRBr10X6tvAqK Hf/A==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.90.144 with SMTP id bw16mr11551710vdb.129.1341551793022; Thu, 05 Jul 2012 22:16:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.110.130 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Jul 2012 22:16:33 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 07:16:33 +0200
Message-ID: <CADnDZ8-hoTgc=Q4AW0E7L+UeKqMQ0HVpW-6gDUzSkDNGLuieEA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.txt> (Publishing the "Tao of the IETF" as a Web Page) to Informational RFC
From: Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
To: john-ietf@jck.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, ietf <ietf@ietf.org>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 05:16:19 -0000
+1 I support all your suggestions (i.e. point 1 and 2, and nits i and ii ) , and hope that iesg, and editor agrees, and that the community considers them for progress. I seen the change in the draft-document-03 which I think getting better but still not satisfied The new vesion 3 draft (dated 5 July) does not include all your suggestion, please read and comment on draft-03 (the subject refers to draft-02, did you read draft-03?). http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-03 AB ============================================= My previous input to the subject: +++++++++++++++++++++++ http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg73771.html http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg73776.html http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg73781.html http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg73782.html http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg73791.html ============================================== > >> The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter >> to consider the following document: >> - 'Publishing the "Tao of the IETF" as a Web Page' >> <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.txt> as Informational RFC > >> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and >> solicits final comments on this action. Please send >> substantive comments to the ietf at ietf.org mailing lists by >> 2012-07-13. > > Hi. > > Just to make a pair of comments that I've sort of made in other > contexts in the particular context of the Last Call. I won't > repeat the details. > > (1) As a general strategy, doing the Tao as a web page seems > like exactly the right thing to do. Some sort of staging > process and opportunity for review of working drafts by the > community as well as the IETF seems important. As far as I can > tell, the document covers that adequately although some details > are not spelled out as well as some would perhaps prefer. > > (2) The document itself mixes a historical discussion of how > things got to where they are with what is being done going > forward. I believe it would be desirable to more clearly > separate that material, into either separate documents or into a > brief core document that focuses of the three questions of "what > is the Tao", "where can it be found", and "what is the revision/ > update procedure" and an appendix that includes whatever else is > determined to be necessary. In that regard, the abstract of the > core (or only) document should not concentrate on when > discussions occurred, etc., but simply on what the Tao is and > why it might be useful. Liberal borrowing from the abstract of > RFC 4677 (or just copying it) would be, IMO, quite appropriate. > > This is less of a problem than it might otherwise be because the > document is so short, but a document that obsoletes RFC 4677 and > its predecessors should address the substances addressed by > 4677, not serve as a historical summary of a few months of > community discussion. > > Nits: > (i) In recent years, the IESG has insisted on specific > documentation when one RFC obsoletes another. This draft does > not mention the "obsoletes" relationship in the Abstract, > Introduction, or any other prominent place. > > (ii) Second paragraph of current Introduction, first sentence, > should contain "discussion that led..." rather than "discussion > that lead...". I believe that paragraph is part of the > historical discussion that belongs somewhere else. > > thanks, > john >
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… Paul Hoffman
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… Harald Alvestrand
- Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.txt>… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… John C Klensin
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… Paul Hoffman
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… John C Klensin
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… Tony Hansen
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… Paul Hoffman
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… Tony Hansen
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… John C Klensin
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… Tony Hansen
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… John C Klensin
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… SM
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… John C Klensin
- Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.… Abdussalam Baryun