On 28.08.2019 19:17, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
Julian, are you really asking that we stop the rollout of v3, have an extended working group process to design a new v3, and then develop tools, etc. for that? I think the community would be very unhappy at the delay.
Rolling out what we have now is fine. Just label it "beta". Pretending it's done when there's a huge backlog of issues however is IMHO not ok. I'm not asking for a working group. What I'm asking for is that we take revising RFC 7991 (which does *not* describe what's being rolled out) seriously, and that the feedback that has come in over almost three years is actually being taken into account.
And just to be clear, I am pretty sure there was input from lots of constituencies at every stage of the development of the v3 we have in front of us.
<https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues>: 44 open issues. <https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-rfcv3-preptool-bis>: 12 open issues. <https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-html-rfc-bis>: 14 open issues There's also unprocessed feedback it xml2rfc's trac instance, plus many mails on xml2rfc/xml2rfc-dev that haven't been replied to. I understand that people want to finish this. It's taken too long, agreed. But what happens now looks like rushing things out, instead of doing it properly, and the way it was promised back when RFC799x were published. Best regards, Julian
