In my personal opinion:
Stephen Hayes (TX/EUS) wrote:
There is an error in mankin-pub-req-06. Requirement:
o Req-POSTEDIT-5 - At the direction of the IESG or (IRSG or IAB), the
publisher should publish a document with minimal editing.
This should, indeed, be deleted.
And,
The goals of this draft probably can be formulated in different ways.
1/ requirement to publish (chunks of) text verbatim,
because they have been adequately reviewed and arrived
at by some careful negotiation.
Could be handled by:
"In specific instances, where some or all of document text is the result
of a careful negotiation of contributions (within or between working
groups, reviewers, etc), the IESG will require that the publisher
publish the text verbatim. It is the expectation of the IETF
community that this will not be done often."
Whereas:
2/ requirement to adjust the level of editorial scrutiny
applied by the RFC Editor
This is largely addressed in Req-POSTEDIT-1 through -4 (copied below for
convenience). There is some possibility that there should be clarity
about how the style is specified or whether it should be
overridden by a different set of guidelines for a specific document.
But the notion of "minimal editing" is not actionable -- either there
is a strong reason why the text should be included verbatim (see
above), or we need to manage to the existing requirements.
WRT getting in the way of the type of experiment proposed in
draft-eronen-rfc-selective-experiment-00.txt -- I'm sympathetic,
to the extent we believe the IETF community *wants* to be
able to engage in such experiments (I'll observe it's a personal
-00 submission). But, much of the motivation of that experiment
should be undone if we do the TechSpec job properly.
Leslie.
[From the -06 document:]
o Req-POSTEDIT-1 - The IETF technical publisher should review the
document for grammar, spelling, formatting, adherence to
boilerplate, document structure, proper use of keywords, etc. The
review should strive to maintain consistency in appearance with
previously published documents.
o Req-POSTEDIT-2 - All changes made to post-approval documents
should be tracked and the changes must be signed off on by the
appropriate technical representatives as defined in the IETF
processes.
o Req-POSTEDIT-3 - The IETF Technical editor should refrain from
stylistic changes that introduce a substantial review load but
only provides incremental increase in the clarity of the
specification. Specific guidelines on the types of changes
allowed may be further specified, but ultimately restraint in
editing must be imposed by the IETF technical publisher. Changes
for stylistic consistency should be done only when there are major
problems with the quality of the document.
o Req-POSTEDIT-4 - The IETF Technical editor should refrain from
changes to improve readability that may change technical and
consensus wording. Specific guidelines on the types of changes
allowed may be further specified, but ultimately restraint in
editing must be imposed by the IETF technical publisher.
_______________________________________________
Techspec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/techspec
