I see this as a bigger problem - some working groups that have more work in individual drafts than in working group drafts, because they wait until they have substantial consensus around drafts before even adopting them, while other working groups create initial text as working group drafts and then start wordsmithing from there - but haven't found anyone else that was interested in formalizing what it means when working groups adopt a draft.
My particular interest was as part of ICAR - I was thinking that there's a blizzard of individual drafts, but if something is adopted as a working group draft, it starts to absorb working group and AD time (at a minumum), so this transition point might be a good opportunity for a formal review.
But ICAR won't be worrying about this topic anytime in the foreseeable future :-)
Spencer
From: "Dave Crocker" <dhc2@xxxxxxxxxxxx> To: "Tony Hansen" <tony@xxxxxxx>; "John C Klensin" <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> Cc: <ietf@xxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 7:21 PM Subject: Re: MARID back from the grave?
.................................................
It's just a name.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf