On 16-Oct-20 14:19, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>
>
>> On 16 Oct 2020, at 11:46 am, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Greg,
>>
>> Who is fact-checking this?
>>
>> For example, in the archive I see:
>>
>> "The HTTP Range Requests standard has been under discussion at the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) for more than half a decade,..."
>>
>> There is no such thing as the HTTP Range Requests standard. There is a draft "draft-ietf-httpbis-semantics" that replaced an earlier draft "draft-ietf-httpbis-range". Maybe one day the current draft will proceed through WG Last Call, AD review, IETF Last Call, and an IESG ballot, and finally be approved as a Proposed Standard. Or maybe not.
>
> Just a nit - range requests were first standardised as part of RFC2068 (1997), then revised in RFC2616 (1999) and split out into a separate RFC7233 (2014); they're currently being folded back into draft-ietf-httpbis-semantics.
Well, that's more than a nit, but I think it strengthens the case for fact checking and for a strong disclaimer. Replicating "news" items that are often nothing more than PR pieces already replicated by lazy journalists could put us in an invidious position.
Regards
Brian
>
> All of that said, I agree that the statement "The HTTP Range Requests standard has been under discussion at the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) for more than half a decade" is very odd - it's more like ~25 years.
>
> Still, this is a news clipping service; if we have problems with the contents of the articles, we need to go back to the sources...
>
> Cheers,
>
>>
>> We constantly have to push back on claims that drafts are IETF standards; it's a bit disturbing when such false claims appear in our own output.
>>
>> A bit further on I see "互联网工程任务组IETF主席的Brian E.Carpenter教授发表了". No, I can't suddenly read and write Chinese; this was translated with my permission from https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~brian/InterOmnesNovasRete.html .
>>
>> Apart from fact-checking, I think we need a prominent disclaimer on each edition that this is *not* information from the IETF and that is does *not* express the opinion of the IETF, ISOC, or anyone else in particular.
>>
>> Regards
>> Brian
>>
>> On 16-Oct-20 04:04, Greg Wood wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> With the aim of better tracking where, when, and how IETF-related issues are presented in a variety of news outlets and other online publications, we have set up a weekly email to provide a collection of stories published around the world curated by David Goldstein. [1]
>>>
>>> Based on positive reactions so far, we are inviting anyone from this list to sign up via:
>>>
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/newsclips
>>>
>>> Archives are openly available and the preface to the first edition from the test period provides a bit more background about the approach:
>>>
>>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/newsclips/4py4Y7OPXvJ9MjesGAZEGs8Oe0o/
>>>
>>> Please let me know if you have any questions.
>>>
>>> Feedback and suggestions are always welcome.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>> -Greg
>>>
>>> [1] https://goldsteinreport.com/about/
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Greg Wood
>>> ghwood@xxxxxxxx
>>> +1-703-625-3917
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
>
>
