Hi, On 23/04/2015 21:33, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > Hi Brian, > > On 23/04/15 05:08, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> To some extent this thread has been ducking the question that lies behind it. >> What is an author, in the IETF context? There's no short answer, so here's >> a draft of a long answer. If people think it's useful, I can author an >> I-D about it... > > If you do, please don't use any "must" or "must not" statements. I > reckon there are exceptions in all cases. That must be true. > > For example, sometimes a bis RFC draft is submitted where authors > from the original RFC are included even though they are not working > on the topic at all anymore. That's fine, the authors of the bis > draft or relevant WG might want to continue to ack the original > work done in that way and I don't believe we should have any > problem with that. (Well, auth-48 can be a minor problem but we > can deal with it.) I'm not sure we agree on that, because in general we don't know that the original authors agree with the changes to their work. But yes, wiggle room is good in that case. > As another example, we have had at least one case where a listed > authors was deceased at the time of publication but where it was > correct to leave their name on the RFC. > > I think new normative rule making here is not going to be useful. > And even if you don't reference 2119, using "must not" will be > read by some as if it's a hard and fast rule. > > Non normative guidance as to what's common and what's not considered > acceptable (such as adding an unwilling "author") is very useful > though. Sure. OK, I've had enough +ve feedback that I will bang out a draft for convenient reference. (I'm not at all convinced it needs to become an RFC, however.) Brian > > S. > >> >> Scope >> >> These guidelines are aimed at Internet-Drafts in the IETF publication stream. >> They are intended to be compatible with the RFC Editor's style guide (RFC7322) >> as well. >> >> Authors >> >> Authors are people who have made a substantial creative contribution to the document. >> Normally this means writing text or drawing diagrams. Occasionally, with the consent >> of the other authors, it means making some other substantial creative contribution to >> the document, for example by writing a software implementation as part of the design >> process. >> >> People who did not make any such substantial contribution must not be listed >> as authors. People must not be listed as authors without their explicit permission. >> >> The practical impact is that the authors will be listed as such on the front page if >> the document becomes an RFC. >> >> Contributors >> >> Contributors are people who made smaller creative contributions to the document >> than the authors. >> >> People who did not make any such contribution must not be listed as contributors. >> People must not be listed as contributors without their explicit permission. >> >> The dividing line between contributors and authors is matter of judgement. However, >> the RFC Editor's policy is to query any document that has more than five listed authors. >> >> Editors >> >> When a document has a large number of contributors and potential authors, it may >> be appropriate to designate one or two people as "Editors" and list all the others >> as contributors. The practical impact of this is that the editors will be listed >> as such on the front page if the document becomes an RFC. >> >> Acknowledgements >> >> Acknowledgements should be given to people who have made significant creative >> contributions smaller than those from the authors and contributors, or to people >> who have made useful comments, provided critical reviews, or otherwise contributed >> significantly to the development of the document. Acknowledgements may also be given >> to people or organizations that have given material support and assistance, but >> this should not include the authors' regular employers. >> >> An acknowledgement does not signify that the person acknowledged agrees with the >> document. In general, people who do not wish to be listed as an author or a >> contributor, but have in fact made a significant contribution, should be given >> an acknowledgement. >> >> Copyright >> >> None of the above affects copyright. Copyright in IETF documents is governed >> by BCP 78, the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions, and applicable national and >> international law. >> >> Regards >> Brian >> >> On 23/04/2015 14:55, John Levine wrote: >>> In article <20150423021027.GL16567@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> you write: >>>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 01:58:27AM -0000, John Levine wrote: >>>>> Someone pointed out that the authors all get notices when a new draft >>>>> is posted. That seems good enough for the rare cases of false >>>>> attribution, so "never mind". >>>> >>>> Except that the people included are thereby on the record as somehow >>>> being an author of these things, and maybe they don't want to be. I >>>> think that's a little worrisome. >>> >>> I was assuming that aggrieved non-authors could then use out of band >>> means to ask that their unauthored drafts be unpublished. At least >>> this lets them know about funny business. >>> >>> Sure, a sufficiently devious author could use fake addresses that he >>> controlled, but that seems a higher degree of evil than we need to >>> plan for. Should it happen, I'm sure we'll have the tools to swat the >>> violators. >>> >>> R's, >>> John >>> >>> >> >> >