Re: is the WG-Charter concept changed?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Margaret Wasserman wrote:

I think that we should be careful about adding any more steps to the standards publication process, so I will personally tend to push back on any steps that do not, IMO, add significant value.

Ah, yes. Thank you (and other ADs) for doing so.

Today, we do not have an explicit check that a WG work item that has been submitted for publication matches a WG charter milestone or is otherwise within the WG charter. There is an implicit check during AD review, perhaps, but not an explicit one.

I would like to see such an explicit check added, so I personally agree that it would be a good addition to the PROTO questionnaire for the WG chair to state what WG milestone is represented by a particular document and/or otherwise explain how the document is in-charter for the WG. I think that we should consider this addition if/when the PROTO process is updated.

Others may disagree, of course.

I THINK I understand what Margaret is saying here, but two points pop into my mind:

- it is good (see previous Thank You) that the PROTO questionaire does not capture the entire WG standards process, not only because this becomes a long checklist that is easily treated out as a formalism, but also because

- if this check matters, having it come up as "no" on a publication checklist after the working group thinks the work item has been completed is WAY late on the scale of "late surprises".

I note from time to time that there doesn't seem to be much detail about "becoming a working group document" in our process BCPs (there's actually a lot more in the working group chairs/working group leadership EDU tutorial, but most of this postdates the BCPs). If we go here, perhaps this would be one right time to ask the question?

If we do go here, I like the "or otherwise explain how the document is in-charter for the WG" text. If a working group sees a document and says "this is obviously the right thing to do, and we agree, so let's publish it", there's no reason to respin a charter just to forward a document for publication. But writing down why we think publishing is the right thing to do, would be useful.

Spencer


_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]