--On Tuesday, April 28, 2020 14:51 -0400 Phillip Hallam-Baker
<phill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>...
> So the rules give two options for good reason. But for most
> cases, what we really need is possibly a third option which is
> closer to a 'moral right' sort of approach. In certain cases I
> do reserve copyright but what I am really after is a weaker
> condition which is attribution. I would be quite happy with
> someone taking one of my drafts and using it as the basis for a
> new draft provided that there is a prominent notice on the
> front page (or HTML equivalent) stating that this is a
> continuation of my draft and acknowledging that while I do not
> endorse this particular variation, it is built on my work.
Partially as a result of history similar to the cases you
mentioned, that is the reason why a "Contributors" section is
now possible in an RFC or I-D and, as Scott pointed out, its use
is required by BCP 78. It is also discussed in RFC 7322. That
does not give the front page announcement that you are
suggesting, but does provide an opportunity to cover the issue
you identify. I believe those sections have been used to
explicitly acknowledge that one or more Contributors do not
agree with the final result; Acknowledgments have definitely
been used that way.
best,
john
