On 7/6/15 6:57 AM, Leif Johansson wrote: > 6 jul 2015 kl. 16:10 skrev Andrew Newton <andy@xxxxxx > <mailto:andy@xxxxxx>>: >> I think John's point is that in the IETF we usually do not >> interpret lack of feedback as passive approval but rather lack of >> any review. > We also depend on active participation. To be honest, I was completely ignoring the DOI discussion until someone emailed me directly about it. The reasons I was staying away from it include: 1) The IETF is going to do what it's going to do, which tend to be whatever a few people in the leadership want it to do. It's unlikely that participation and review is going to change outcomes on hobbyhorse projects 2) Bibliographic discussions in the IETF tend to be particularly frustrating because there are very few people who actually know anything about the subject matter, but everybody's got an opinion. There's a tendency to fall into the "I'm a smart person, so perhaps I may not know anything about the field but hey, I'm a smart person" trap. This document contains some incorrect statements, or statements so broad as to carry very little information, and there doesn't appear to be much interest among those participating in the discussion in seeing those corrected. That tends to lead to the conclusion that there's no point in participating in discussions about bibliographic matters within the IETF I think problems 1 and 2 are pervasive throughout the IETF's work and not isolated to this particular document, but the fact that this is an area in which so few IETF participants have any expertise tends to bring it out more strongly. I suspect it has something to do with the incredible volume of just plain bad drafts we're facing these days, and the pressures associated with dealing with those. Melinda [BTW, as a (sort-of) side note, if you've read this document you're aware that it not only contains a discussion of assigning DOIs to RFCs but also contains a discussion of the use of DOIs within RFCs, because assigning DOIs to our documents carries with it the obligation to the issuing body to use DOIs within our own documents.]