|
On 10/4/19 10:40 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: Implementing our standards involves a treasure hunt to find how many RFC have to be read before understanding the whole picture.This is problematic, but inherent, not so much in the RFC series, but in the way we've chosen to do our standards process.Bingo! Changing the RFC series *will not* fix this problem. If I understand what problem is being described, I'm not sure changing the standards process would address it either. (Though I do suspect that some changes are in order for other reasons.) Most standards that are used on a large scale will need to be
amended and/or extended over time. Attempting to get everything
right the first time can easily doom a standard to failure for any
of multiple reasons (e.g. irrelevance, or too much complexity, or
too little ability to adapt to changing conditions). In a sense, the extensions and amendments are signs of success. If nobody used the standard, there would probably not be sufficient energy to make the changes. Keith
|
