That sensitivity to costs of participation is not as
important
to most of the SDOs on my list and, I would assume, on yours.
Instead, their norm is participation or membership fees that, in
many cases, I consider high enough to be barriers, requirements
for meeting attendance. If the minimum entry cost for
participation in SDO X --including membership fees and minimal
meeting attendance costs-- is $5K or $10K or more, then maybe
maintaining even a dedicated machine for dealing with their
documents is a reasonable marginal cost. But, for IETF
participation, it is not.
[YJS] This is the first cogent reason I have seen so far on this list
to most of the SDOs on my list and, I would assume, on yours.
Instead, their norm is participation or membership fees that, in
many cases, I consider high enough to be barriers, requirements
for meeting attendance. If the minimum entry cost for
participation in SDO X --including membership fees and minimal
meeting attendance costs-- is $5K or $10K or more, then maybe
maintaining even a dedicated machine for dealing with their
documents is a reasonable marginal cost. But, for IETF
participation, it is not.
[YJS] This is the first cogent reason I have seen so far on this list
against Word. Of course, out suggesting did not
mandate Word,
and specifically allows anyone not having a copy to
continue using
ASCII or XML, and since PDF would be available as
output (and
has a free viewer) all RFCs would be available for all
to read.
The downside is that when a group is working on a
document
in Word, anyone not having the SW would not be able to
directly
contribute - but joint work is not really practical
using any system
without tracking anyway.
Y(J)S
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf