> On Apr 30, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Lee Howard <Lee@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I've been thinking about the point that requiring confirmation from all > authors would slow down the process when against a deadline, and it could > be easily gamed if the submitter lists herself as the only author on the > -00, then immediately submits a -01 listing all of the other authors. Then > the WG gets timely access to the content of the draft, and the authors > bring -01 (fully attributed and attested) as the version for discussion. Well, having done some further research, I think the confirmation would have to be done for each address added. I’m thinking, in that regard, of a specific draft and the pattern of it, in which the draft has gone through multiple iterations in one working group and moved to another, with drops and adds on each iteration of the draft (and no, I don’t want to identify it publicly, as this is neither about the primary author nor the company, it’s about the behavior). Basically, every time there is a putative author in version NN that isn’t in version NN-1, I might suggest querying the address.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail