> Which way of > keeping the status should the Tools team use in the requirements for > the tools it is specifying? "2. Metadata kept separately" a) it's often desirable and occasionally necessary to allow drafts to change from individual to wg and vice versa (or for that matter from one wg to another, as sometimes happens) without having to change the filename b) you're going to need to keep separate metadata for other reasons anyway - you may as well put all of the metadata in one place rather than have some of it in the filename and some of it elsewhere. c) more generally, the tools should exist to support the work rather than impose arbitrary restrictions on the work. which is not to say that the tools should not impose restrictions on how the metadata is used. but if you put some of the metadata in the filename, and tools depend on it being there, it's going to be harder to change, because some of the constraints on the use of that metadata will be artifacts of how the metadata is stored, rather than constraints chosen in such a way as to support IETF's work. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf