On Mon, 4 Jun 2012, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 6/4/2012 12:36 AM, SM wrote:
At 14:33 01-06-2012, Russ Housley wrote:
So, I am left with a few questions:
- What is the similar forcing function if we use a wiki?
- Will the number of people that can make updates eliminate the need
for such a forcing function?
- Who designates the editor-in-chief of the wiki?
...
... Instead of discussing the above questions it is easier
to create an Wiki page and leave it to anyone with a tools login who
cares to update it.
In effect, the wiki construct becomes a form of incrementally-updatable
internet draft. For documents involving procedures rather than products,
this well might be a better working base than I-Ds...
But with the I-D model superimposed.
That is, perhaps what makes this workable is imposing an editor role onto the
wiki and assign responsibility for monitoring changes to the editors? (It
might even be worth integrating it into the rest of the I-D administration
environment?)
Note that this still leaves a place for published snapshots as RFCs.
I like the idea of moving towards a more lively version of the Tao and I
agree with all those who've voiced concerns about using to open of a
process for group editing.
I have an alternate suggestion which tries to walk the "middle way". What
is we create the Tao as a web page with one lead editor (an a possible
second author as needed) who is responsible for regular review and updates
and then spin up an etherpad version of the text which can be edited by
anyone with a tools login? The editor could then track and incorporate
suggested changes into the canonical web page and notify the list when
major updates occur. This would use some familiar elements of our current
document production process and tools we already have in place and would
give the editor a way to contact those with suggested changes if further
dialogue was needed.
One question for the Tools team - can etherpad handle a long lived
document?
- Lucy
d/