On 05/03/2013 03:59 PM, Thomas Narten wrote:
b) There is no interest to research where delay really happen.
I don't think that is true. Jari has pointed to his work. I think
there is actually quite a lot of understanding of where the delays
are. But fixing them is really really hard. Blaming the "tail end" or
"the IESG" for the problems has always been the easy target. The
reality (IMO) is that the place where improvements are needed is
within the WG and on having authors be more responsive. But history
suggests there are no easy fixes here.
The type of data I am looking for is different to what Jari provides.
I want to know what the real reasons are, which requires you to look at
the individual documents and their history. Ultimately there are people
working on these documents and each individual topic has it's own
challenges contributing to delay, quality, etc.
Regarding your statement about the lower number of implementations it
really depends what technology you look at. There are differences in
terms of layers (with lower layer protocols you are less likely to see
lots of implementations than with high layer protocols), and the
dependencies a specific technology has (a feature that depends on 10
other things to be implemented and deployed will see fewer
implementations).
An example: in JOSE and in OAuth you see a larger number of
implementations already at an early stage of the document work. How many
of those will then ultimately get updated to the published RFCs remains
to be seen.