The fact that designers have been forced to go through the process of generating a description is often very useful.
What I have been doing is to make the presentation of what and why into podcasts that are up on YouTube. I think UNIX would have come out very differently if the designers had been required to work with a technical writer and explain what was going on. Lot of needless obfustication would have been easier to fix than to explain. Which is of course why there is a resistance to doing such exercises. On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Melinda Shore <melinda.sh...@gmail.com>wrote: > 1) I've asked Ben and his co-authors to resubmit > draft-laurie-rfc6962-bis as draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis > > 2) We need to nail down milestones. In particular we need > to have a reasonable ballpark estimate of when we'll get > the bis draft into working group last call. I'd like more > feedback from the authors and working group participants > on what they and you feel needs to be done to wrap up > the draft. Does late 2014 seem reasonable for working > group last call? > > 3) Another question is whether or not there are sections > of 6962bis which ought to be moved to separate documents, > such as client behavior. > > 4) London planning: I am generally not a fan of burning up > meeting time on PowerPoint-driven presentations - they're > sometimes unavoidable but IETF meetings are working meetings > and I'd rather use the time productively, for face to face > discussion of things which are difficult to work out on > the mailing list or which would benefit from more interactivity > than we can get with email. We don't have a huge amount of > spare time in London but we can squeeze in some people in > if they've got something that needs attention or that would > help move the document along > > 5) the corollary to 4 is that I do try to get as much done on > the mailing list as possible. One thing that's been useful > in some circumstances in the past has been an issue tracker. > We do have a working group wiki page with an issue tracker, > and I'd like to get a sense of whether the working group in > general and the authors more specifically would find it > helpful in progressing the document. > > 6) Are there other process issues you'd like to see addressed? > > Once I hear from Ben et al. I'll get a draft agenda for London > posted. > > Thanks, > > Melinda > > _______________________________________________ > therightkey mailing list > therightkey@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/therightkey > -- Website: http://hallambaker.com/
_______________________________________________ therightkey mailing list therightkey@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/therightkey
