Re: WG Document Shepherd Write-Up Template: Call for review (Ends 22/05/2026)

[David R Oran <[e-mail]>]

> On May 3, 2026, at 9:21 AM, Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
+10. I have found shepherd material to be 95% make-work for the vast majority of drafts under my purview. the Few that required context or clarification beyond what all the WG/RG participants already know and what the community needs know beyond the text in the draft can certainly benefit from some material, with the “template” not a rigid set of things to fill out but rather a set of guidelines for what text would be helpful to progressing toward publication.

> 
> Hiya,
> 
> The write-up stuff is **way** too long. I expect this review
> will sadly add more instead of removing stuff, because it
> seems we can't resist doing that to ourselves;-(
> 
> Perhaps offer a 2nd, terse option, where shepherds are asked
> to write one short paragraph that describes whatever is odd
> or noteworthy? That way people who like long multi-question
> forms with loads of "N/A" answers can use the long version,
> but those who prefer to pass on just the useful info would
> have the option to not deal with the overlong thing.
> 
> Thanks,
> S.
> 
> 
>> On 03/05/2026 10:30, [e-mail] wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> The IESG is considering an update of the WG document writeup template to take into account the experience with the template so far. Overall, the proposed changes fall under the following categories: clarify some questions that are vague, update questions that include stale guidance or not aligned with our process, simplify some questions and soften the load on the shepherd, and add few questions to help flag and fix early in the process some aspects that are recurrently subject to DISCUSS ballots. The proposed changes can be better tracked by checking the following links:
>>   *   Draft update (05/2026): https://github.com/IETF-OPS-AD/misc/blob/main/document%20writeup%20template/document-shepherd-writeup-wg-documents.md
>>   *   Current version (2022): https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/shepherdwriteup-template/workinggroup
>>   *   Diff between old/proposed: https://github.com/IETF-OPS-AD/misc/blob/main/document%20writeup%20template/writeup-diff.pdf
>> As a WG Chair, it is likely that you shepherded yourself a document or helped a non-'WG Chair' shepherd (*) complete a writeup. Your experience and perspective are thus important to help the IESG in preparing this revision.
>> We are interested to hear your feedback about the template in general, whether the load to complete it is acceptable, whether there are questions that lack clarity, there are missing questions, or there are questions that you think can be removed because of some reason. Suggestions and proposals are more than welcome.
>> Feel free to raise your comments/suggestions by email or as github issue by 22/05/2026.
>> Thank you.
>> Cheers,
>> Med
>> (*) A call for review/feedback will also be sent to a pool of recent document non-'WG Chair' shepherds.
>> ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
>> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
>> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
>> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
>> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
>> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
>> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
>> Thank you.
> 
> <OpenPGP_signature.asc>