[Pesci-discuss] Fw: (from Techspec) Non-Author Editing

"Spencer Dawkins" <spencer@mcsr-labs.org> Tue, 22 November 2005 16:55 UTC

Received: from localhost.cnri.reston.va.us ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EebQp-0003hC-TM; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:55:47 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EebQn-0003gp-Tu for pesci-discuss@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:55:45 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA11586 for <pesci-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:55:07 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net ([204.127.202.56]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EebjT-0005iG-Uj for pesci-discuss@ietf.org; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 12:15:05 -0500
Received: from s73602 (unknown[65.104.224.98]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with SMTP id <20051122165530012001fni4e>; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:55:31 +0000
Message-ID: <036e01c5ef85$704d9a70$56087c0a@china.huawei.com>
From: Spencer Dawkins <spencer@mcsr-labs.org>
To: PESCI Discuss Mailing List <pesci-discuss@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 10:54:39 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type="response"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8b30eb7682a596edff707698f4a80f7d
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Pesci-discuss] Fw: (from Techspec) Non-Author Editing
X-BeenThere: pesci-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Process Evolution Study Committee of the IETF discussion <pesci-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss>, <mailto:pesci-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/pesci-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:pesci-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pesci-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss>, <mailto:pesci-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: pesci-discuss-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: pesci-discuss-bounces@ietf.org

I agree with Leslie and Brian on their Techspec postings (see below), but 
this does remind me that we were trying to figure out principles in PESCI 
(and had a lot of consequences-of-principles, but possibly don't have things 
boiled down to principles yet).

In the following case,

Brian Carpenter wrote:


> Leslie Daigle wrote:
>>
>> (Commenting as an individual)
>
> ditto
>
>> So, your example is supporting that the path to "no post approval
>> changes" is "pre-approval editing", not "no editing".
>
> This sounds like a good principle to me, and it creates the possibility
> of parallelism during the editing stage, as long as it stays under
> the responsibility of each WG.
>
>    Brian

I'm thinking there's an IETF principle behind Brian's "as long as" caveat 
that looks something like

Working groups are responsible for the text of specifications they develop 
from the point of adoption as a working group draft until publication. The 
working group controls all changes to the text of a working group draft.

And, to pop up Yet Another Level - did we decide whether to continue 
developing the principles list, and (if so), who, how, and where?

Thanks,

Spencer 


_______________________________________________
Pesci-discuss mailing list
Pesci-discuss@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss