On 4/27/21 6:30 PM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
I have found repeatedly that
1) having explicit control moved to the WG for a document is very
useful for a WG working on the document
2) That being explicit about that change is very helpful for keeping
everyone on the same page.
As far as I can tell, such "control" is an illusion, or at best, an
abstraction of polite cooperation between parties who are not required
to cooperate. Happily, that's usually the result.
One potential issue could crop up when a WG asserts "control", makes a
derivative work of an original author's derivative work, and does so in
such a way as to (appear to) misrepresent the original author's views.
My understanding is that "moral rights" aren't respected as part of
copyright in much of the world, but that they're not entirely
nonexistent either.
Anyway I think it's probably better to not think of "change control" as
if nobody else but the WG has the right to edit the original document
(which is clearly not the case), but instead to think in terms of which
document the WG is going to collaborate on and which it intends to
eventually submit for an IETF Last Call. And the WG is free to change
its mind about that.
Keith
