[rfc-i] AUTH48 workflow [was [Rfced-future] Welcome to the RFC Editor Future Development Program]

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Thu, 02 April 2020 03:33 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 450283A065A; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 20:33:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.447
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YRjZv0LsJpTA; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 20:32:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 614FC3A08B3; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 20:32:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D868F4070B; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 20:32:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B95CF4070B for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 20:32:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zS7VidmjYVnL for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 20:32:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pj1-x1029.google.com (mail-pj1-x1029.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1029]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EF5DF406F7 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 20:32:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pj1-x1029.google.com with SMTP id jz1so2869078pjb.0 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 01 Apr 2020 20:32:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yRXW8/TT6GftZiPNK7RDA8eYYlRhVU5b1EmmfnHUyGg=; b=r0CZ7EkqgJX02hDpKZkdUDCwrDyqFZwmj9THFpdyAetlKgxqGgpdZzCCK+e367wmYA TXxWQ9ruF7Hf+0INy5vSUBtcX48lxHkATLU8XdVXcqDAduPlsh6W4FdBEPOzXe1CxMd2 QNGHLM1941ZBZB5fBusYnOQWmDeeTXl52Ty8MH5uogA+w58A9EwfzFDg1y2xoUA5fw28 WpQdNtWu4RoM97WJV5FUDXDk0pzyk/tQTOTIDm00YjVmL8vN2H4XQmwev8JDOpjRJrWy 7FWcPF3mZsbAq7A2/GH0Z9DGqh1mSBumKuOo2KFiKZsWCWkq1E6SCsWZfvWhAEvQKxaw eIdg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=yRXW8/TT6GftZiPNK7RDA8eYYlRhVU5b1EmmfnHUyGg=; b=Y79vmzPXOwFyH86Dgjh4KuM/SQvEbLUJKvuEMNzgseNwPmF5dYmwT2UScrA4Ij1nw1 0h+Hi8VJw7vXiPa3nJt5KalihOeC+Lz85qL+HcUc15hj1oVOYEx8HypuJx9PATHmLW0V jIod7zB7/8o8/gjKtMio/qBqcIS8ybKw27P17j/cZWrlKfPwvFxE+MOWI7/+jbjtGVNk ugBgKXTibZ0aOIScdUDKwQBtsHR+98w0Hcgh3ny0u+85RZEHonCjPah8ZpPBuTONtC0R VQZ9QjHptW88YkQEpPWiVD0XhhIE6xOCYWRV0GKrz/laR2qWcCC1gBY4LZCGfJSMN+HF Bp3w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZavjG2tDACAiM1ap5hL907tNQAL5GnCeLsTzLDUnT3tG1aIq3E CjbB/E0Rlfe84Cwxq5Rx8PTPp4E/
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypIuC+cfvDxTefq6cXGzBHfV2y/NUCFirWxA5OZZuOLc6NbWigt8Hzu0mORpku2zxHKFyJVGJg==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:36c7:: with SMTP id t65mr1402007pjb.182.1585798375012; Wed, 01 Apr 2020 20:32:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.30] ([165.84.25.143]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i187sm2641540pfg.33.2020.04.01.20.32.52 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 01 Apr 2020 20:32:54 -0700 (PDT)
To: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>, 'Michael StJohns' <msj@nthpermutation.com>, RFC Interest <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
References: <97B63B78-0D49-4007-B8A2-101FB7849C0F@cisco.com> <e1876470-c6aa-da6a-5282-5fe2a4d8d893@cs.tcd.ie> <612878B544D3F4BD620D9650@PSB> <c8b96911-e57f-e324-6c58-042a4ca0a3f2@cs.tcd.ie> <0a9001d60887$02d355e0$087a01a0$@acm.org> <b4b6d85a-3f2e-fa13-0dab-36daf66dc67d@nthpermutation.com> <0ac801d6089c$c36031b0$4a209510$@acm.org>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c9be4f85-00a6-a8ad-7c49-9f46930fe425@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2020 16:32:50 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <0ac801d6089c$c36031b0$4a209510$@acm.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: [rfc-i] AUTH48 workflow [was [Rfced-future] Welcome to the RFC Editor Future Development Program]
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-interest" <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

On 02-Apr-20 16:14, Larry Masinter wrote:
> I think what I'm calling the "AUTH48" problem was greatly exacerbated by the format switch, making the normal publishing process of reviewing "galley proofs" to be too onerous for those familiar with the material vs. the RFC Editor who has enough to worry about without knowing what might or might not be significant elements of typography, spacing, emphasis in formats that the author didn't even review (text, html, pdf)
> 
> IMHO, the "real problem" from a publishing workflow point of view  is that there is a workflow task that is not explicitly assigned, namely to validate that the to-be-published RFC, in all its published formats, reflects the intent of the author and the body that approved it.

That's *exactly* the purpose of AUTH48, and that's why AUTH48 sometimes lasts much longer than 48 hours. In my experience, ADs and WG chairs are often involved in discussion of whether certain changes are editorial or substantive.

I have no experience of AUTH48 for the v3 format, but I find reviewing v3 HTML documents much easier than txt. (For only reviewing diffs, txt remains better. But at AUTH48 one is explcitly asked to review the whole document.)

In any case, I am sure this is off topic for the rfced-future list, so I switched lists.

    Brian
> 
> It's easy to imagine the results would be a lot of unmet expectation and finger pointing, and arguments about what the "real problem" was.
> --
> https://LarryMasinter.net
> 
>   
> 
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest