Hi, I agree with Brian Carpenter’s suggestion that started this thread. I do not think we should do anything that makes IDs have more status. They should continue as working documents. They shouldn’t get any additional status until at least the chairs declare a w.g. consensus to advance them to the IESG. Until this happens, they should remain working documents. In the w.g. I co-chair and ones I participate in, it’s already getting hard to adopt documents, basically the bar is being raised to make adoption more like requiring a w.g. consensus. Giving IDs more status will make this worse. Personally, I think the w.g. adoption hurdle should not be too high, because it’s the stage when it becomes a w.g. document and not under the control of the authors. My main point, is that giving IDs more status will have an unwelcome side effect of raising the bar to have IDs adopted in a w.g. Note, I have had drafts that didn’t get adopted, drafts that were adopted but not advanced, drafts that were advanced to the IESG and returned, and drafts that got through all of the process and were published as RFCs. All of the cases, I think. Bob
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
