To make them all parallel in structure, the first numbered item in section 3 becomes: "1. The IESG finds no conflict between this document and IETF work."

In RFC 3932, these numbered items (except the first one, which is the same until the modification above) begin "The IESG thinks" During pre-Last-Call-review, I received feedback that "The IESG finds" was a better. Now, you propose "The IESG believes". I do believe that the current wording is better than the original. I'm willing to change it to something else if there is consensus to do so. What do other reviewers find/think/believe/prefer?

In a different message, John mentioned ""has concluded". That sounds better as the numbered items are about conclusions reached. My second preference would be "The IESG believes".

I am happy with "has concluded".  The numbered list is changed as follows:

   The IESG review of these Independent Stream and IRTF Stream documents
   reach one of the following five types of conclusions.

   1. The IESG has concluded that there is no conflict between this
      document and IETF work.

   2. The IESG has concluded that this work is related to IETF work done
      in WG <X>, but this relationship does not prevent publishing.

   3. The IESG has concluded that publication is potentially harmful to
      the IETF work done in WG <X> and recommends not publishing the
      document at this time.

   4. The IESG has concluded that this document violates IETF procedures
      for <X> and should therefore not be published without IETF review
      and IESG approval.

   5. The IESG has concluded that this document extends an IETF protocol
      in a way that requires IETF review and should therefore not be
      published without IETF review and IESG approval.

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

Reply via email to