Allison, On 10/03/2015 15:56, Allison Mankin wrote: > As Yoav mentioned, the authors are new attendees, and the work is targeted > to an IRTF group at that. I have an acquaintance with them and hope they > aren't reading this, but how do folks think this outcry about seems as a > welcome to do work here? I worried about that before sending my note, but decided that an invented example was not persuausive. If there's a fault, it's "ours" for not making the convention a bit more apparent to newcomers. That's what needs fixing. Brian > On Mar 9, 2015 10:37 PM, "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > >> On 10/03/2015 10:08, Jari Arkko wrote: >>> Brian, >>> >>> Are you suggesting that we should try to prevent the IETF >>> participants from being clever with the naming of their >>> drafts and protocols? Good luck with that :-) >> >> I wouldn't want to do that, for sure. >> >>> I think the current status is actually pretty reasonable - >>> although if Jordi doesn’t know about the convention >>> then we should perhaps advertise it more widely. >> >> Yes. And the draft submission page would be a good place to >> have a pointer to the advertisement. >> >>> However, I’m not sure stricter *rules* about >>> the file names will buy us that much. And >>> we already enforce the use of draft-ietf-* only >>> for adopted documents, which I think is the useful >>> case. >> >> I wouldn't go further than having the tool throw up an >> "Are you sure?" dialogue box if it sees a name with only >> one component after "draft-". >> >> Brian >>> >>> Personally, I look at the drafts that are discussed >>> on the list or are on the agenda, not because they >>> have someone’s name on them… in any case, >>> given that there are usually multiple authors, >>> looking for interesting material based on >>> someone’s last name isn’t really going to >>> work on merely based on the file name. Similarly, >>> often there is no working group yet for a topic, >>> so we end up with draft-someone-newtopic-00.txt. >>> I wouldn’t mind a warning based on seeing >>> draft-oneword-00.txt in the submission tool… >>> but I also wouldn’t it rate it very highly in the >>> overall priorities of tool support. >>> >>> Jari >>> >> >> >