Hi, Thomas,
I may not be making myself clear enough here...
From: "Thomas Narten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> for excessive changes at that stage, which *does* happen,
> the publisher needs to be able to say no.
... and get lost here. I'm fine with the AD saying "that change is
excessive for AUTH48" to authors, but having the technical publisher
tell the AD(s, or the IESG), "that change is excessive for AUTH48"
seems like a stretch.
excessive: you know it when you see it. Like when an l2tp document
asked for 278 editorial changes during AUTH48. (No, I'm not making
this up!)
Fully ACK on "excessive". My concern was about the technical publisher being
the one who "knows it when you see it" - Stephen's point that saying "no"
and saying "this is going to take a while" are probably very similar
regarding what happens next seems helpful here.
I'm OK with the technical publisher saying, "if you want us to make 278
changes, this is going to the bottom of the queue", or even, "please go away
and come back when you have a document that looks like text you actually
want to publish", but not saying, "no, we need to publish the document
without making the changes, because the number of AUTH48 changes are
excessive".
And that's why I'm lost.
Spencer
_______________________________________________
Techspec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/techspec
