Re: Guidelines for authors and reviewers

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

 



Hi Ted,

Ted Hardie wrote:
> At 10:55 AM -0700 6/3/08, Suresh Krishnan wrote:
>> ***************************START OF TEXT********************************
>> 4.2 Recipients of the review
>>
>> The list of recipients of the review is tricky to get right. The main
>> idea is to make sure all the relevant people receive the review. The
>> recipient list is determined mainly by the following factors
>>
>> * The timeframe of the review (early vs. late)
>> * The contents of the review (editorial vs. technical)
>>
>> Early reviews are usually performed by active participants of a working
>> group.
> 
> 
> Suresh,
> 	Can you describe  the difference between "early reviews
> performed by active participants" and just "participation"?   In my
> mind, folks making suggestions and noting issues with a document during
> the working group phase are WG contributors, not reviewers.  How do
> you see this?

I see it just like you :-). The early reviewers are contributors and 
participants. The reason I made the distinction is because reviews are 
only one form of participation in the working group. There are other 
ways to participate in the working group

* Editing documents
* Keeping track of issues
* Contributing text to sections
etc.

Thanks
Suresh
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

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