capturing the intended standards level, Re: Last Call: <draft-housley-two-maturity-levels-06.txt> (Reducing the Standards Track to Two Maturity Levels) to BCP

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

 



On 09.05.2011 19:07, SM wrote:
...
For what it is worth, the draft was intended for publication as an
Internet Standard (STD 71). As I see it, the problem here is that
"Intended status: Standards Track" is assumed to be "Proposed Standard".
As the Document Shepherd runs a draft through Id-nits, he or she will
not catch the above issue. It's unlikely that the IETF Secretariat will
catch the issue.
...

rfc2629.xslt allows specifying the intended maturity in the XML source...:

<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2629xslt/rfc2629xslt.html#rfc.section.12.1.p.2>

...but it's only metadata in the XML source. Maybe we should add it to the ID boilerplate in the future?

Best regards, Julian
_______________________________________________
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]