Re: Evolving Documents (nee "Living Documents") side meeting at IETF105.)

[john heasley <[e-mail]>]

Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 10:48:41AM -0400, John C Klensin:
> and review only by
> self-selected specialist groups.

No one has said/suggested 'self-selected'.  anyone can review any document.

> I don't see what value doing the
> work in the IETF provides other than an apparent endorsement

Because it is related to products of the ietf and that is where,
presumably, the expertise for the given product lies.  If you want to
fix the pluggable optic MSA, I presume you would go to the IEEE - not
my area of expertise, so don't bother correcting which group mangled it.

> that can be presented as involving more than a working group.

This seems like a claim that a LD with the aforementioned review process
would affect the reputation of RFCs, which I reject.  it is presented as
involving the process and those whom the document type claims.  RFC has
a process, BCP has one, LD would have one, and PRETZEL would have one.
BCP, mpov, carries far more weight than RFC.

> Exactly.  And if I wanted to push parts of my i18n work forward,

which is what?  What is your i18n work?  I do not know.  If it is
definition of the wire formats, etc - no, that is not the goal here.
Not mine, nor Job's.  A 7525-like document about i18n would be, again
mpov.