--On Saturday, 04 July, 2015 19:28 +0200 Leif Johansson
<leifj@xxxxxx> wrote:
>> This is one of the points I've been trying to make. The issue
>> for me is not, and hasn't been, whether we should assign DOIs
>> to the RFC Series or not -- I really don't care. And it isn't
>> "surprise" because, as Heather points out, it wasn't hard to
>> know that a decision had been taken to "do DOIs" and that
>> _some_ DOI arrangements were underway. I am more concerned
>> about the decisions that lead to this "decide first, make
>> irrevocable decisions about details (or just let them
>> happen), deploy, and _then_ ask for review. And that leads
>> exactly to Patrik's comment about what we "COULD" have done
>> above.
>
> Perhaps the RSE interpreted the lack of feedback on those
> announcements on rfc-interest as indication that nobody gave a
> hoot about the details. I certainly would have.
Heather can (and should) speak for herself, but I believe she is
quite aware that there are a number of people in the community
who have very specific expertise in some relevant areas but who
don't follow rfc-interest or who have stopped doing so.
Consider, as a possible analogy, a WG whose discussions involve
so much noise and trivia that people drift away on the basis
that they are busy and there is nothing happening on that list
that they care about. Then something different is mentioned and
those mentioning it take silence from whomever is left as either
approval or justification to make decisions without asking the
WG because "nobody gave a hoot". We normally don't consider
that as either consensus or even consultation and review.
john