Re: RFC Editor Function SOW Review

"Joel M. Halpern" <joel@stevecrocker.com> Sun, 23 July 2006 16:58 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G4hIB-0002tE-Ks; Sun, 23 Jul 2006 12:58:59 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G4hI9-0002t9-Qw for ietf@ietf.org; Sun, 23 Jul 2006 12:58:57 -0400
Received: from elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.61]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G4hI8-0006Zl-JG for ietf@ietf.org; Sun, 23 Jul 2006 12:58:57 -0400
Received: from [4.239.69.67] (helo=JMHLap3.stevecrocker.com) by elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1G4hI7-0007op-Ns; Sun, 23 Jul 2006 12:58:56 -0400
Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.0.20060723125623.03347790@stevecrocker.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 12:58:54 -0400
To: Dave Crocker <dhc2@dcrocker.net>
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <joel@stevecrocker.com>
In-Reply-To: <44C2BD28.1040905@dcrocker.net>
References: <E1Fzuxq-00008O-RE@ietf.org> <p07000c0ac0e14b409bc3@[216.43.25.67]> <44BBBC82.8000509@dcrocker.net> <44C0FA2D.1090505@isi.edu> <44C15165.8030407@dcrocker.net> <100683ABC471EA88FEE8E373@p3.JCK.COM> <44C2BD28.1040905@dcrocker.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-ELNK-Trace: 9f083ca8aeb2d326d5a073bfd238dd844d2b10475b571120aa2c36214b659ed09afd98e491d8bcea28640faf56c59ed2350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 4.239.69.67
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7d33c50f3756db14428398e2bdedd581
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: RFC Editor Function SOW Review
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

Given the number of different working groups that have produced 
diffiult to read documents for RFC publication,
the indications are that we are missing some necessary ingredient for 
achieving this within the working group process.
I do not know if we lack the skills, incentives, or resources, but 
history indicates that we frequently have produced documents that 
still need significant editing.
While having a goal of improving this makes good sense, I think we 
need to work from the WG end, not the editor end.  Until we are 
producing better results, we can not cut down on the editing process.

Yours,
Joel M. Halpern

At 08:04 PM 7/22/2006, Dave Crocker wrote:
>What I HAVE said is that the process of getting and demonstrating sufficient
>community support should include requiring acceptable writing of the
>specifications. If an effort is not able to recruit sufficient resources for
>that task, then I frankly question whether it has sufficient market "pull" to
>succeed.


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf