My view since we do these user collaboration, "group ware" online
hosting software for a Living.... and deal with this "evolutionary"
ideas that always seem to be better but not always applicable.
Realistically, it has to be single source and as a migration, I think
it should be explored where the IETF links to the I-D have a user
followup/comment systems ala the PHP example (but there are many
others). For sure the I-D. For RFC, the "Request For Comment" still
apply but not sure "How Much" more you want - some difference I think.
The only main issue is the decision of "membership" vs "anonymous"
input. That is always the main issue with any sort of group ware
concept. The Author should be some responsibility (e.g. the Moderator
of the input).
The IETF can just supply the tool, the backend software for this.
--
Keith Moore wrote:
On Sep 16, 2011, at 3:26 PM, Andrew Feren wrote:
On Fri 16 Sep 2011 03:22:08 PM EDT, Keith Moore wrote:
On Sep 16, 2011, at 3:07 PM, hector wrote:
I don't see these ass "Wikis" but basically "blog style" flat display of user comments, which I often do find useful, especially for the user ("this way") upon user ("not always") follow ups.
A Wiki is more where you can change the main content and perhaps even the context. I don't think that is a good idea for RFCs.
I'm thinking in terms of a hybrid Wiki where the RFC content is static but the discussion is maintainable as a Wiki and can be visually associated with the RFC content. You'd also want the RFC content to be clearly distinguished from the discussion.
Keith
Something like the annotate POD feature for perl modules on CPAN?
Example:
Unannotated
http://search.cpan.org/~timb/DBI-1.616/DBI.pm
Annotated
http://www.annocpan.org/~TIMB/DBI-1.616/DBI.pm
Yes, something like that.
Keith
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf