--On Thursday, April 22, 2010 23:45 +0200 Martin Rex <mrex@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Maybe this is much more of a tools than of a procedural issue? > (I personally don't know the AUTH48 and editing process). > > If the RFC Editor would provide his edited document back to the > document author in a format that can be diffed to the approved > I-D with a tool like > > http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=approved-I-D.txt&url2=RFC-E > dited-I-D.txt > > then it should be sufficiently easy for the document author to > quickly and easily review the RFC Editor's changes and their > impact. The RFC Editor has been providing authors with both proposed final text and a diff (in "HTML diff" form) for some years. When the document is submitted in XML form, the RFC Editor has also been providing the updated XML and asking that additional changes or corrections be made directly on it. So I think the problem to which you are proposing a solution was solved years ago, and solved more or less the way you are suggesting. john _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf