Subject: RE: Formalizing Design Teams

From: Eastlake III Donald-LDE008 <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:27:55 -0500

The whole concept of "The Editor" seems like something that
either grew out of early small IETF WGs or other standards
bodies. I'm almost never been involved with a WG where there
was The Editor the way it seems to be contemplated in IETF
process documents. The IETF documents geneally list the
people who, to the greatest extent, have their hands on the
text. They usually write a lot of it. There is no way to
cleanly separate authors and editors unless perhaps you have
authors who prepare a complete document and then pass it off
to editors who are required to make no techncial changes,
an arrangement that almost never occurs in the IETF. The W3C
likes the top level people to be called Editor(s) while in 
the IETF the term Author(s) is more common but there isn't
much difference that I can see in how it works on a day to
day basis.

If whoever has their hands on the text and is doing the edits
won't follow WG direction, they have to be replaced and their
name moved to a "contributors" section or the like (unless
they go off in a huff and specifically ask that their name
be left out). That's all there is to it.

Donald

-----Original Message-----
From: Kurt D. Zeilenga [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 2:37 PM
To: James Luciani
Cc: Marshall Rose; Margaret Wasserman; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: Formalizing Design Teams

The most problematic design teams I've come across is the one
often referred to as "the authors".  It seems "the editor"
forgets that "the authors" are providing input to the WG and
that this input has no more weight than input from others.

One of things that might help remind "the authors" that they
are given no more weight is not to list them at the top of
the WG I-D.

For this reason, I would like the IETF adopt a practice that
IETF documents list only the Editor in the header.

Kurt

---

From: "James Luciani" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:35:25 -0500

I suppose it is too radical to suggest that names (except thank yous) are
not placed on RFCs at all? During draft, it is necessary to find "editor"
though.  And if anyone "REALLY" needs to talk with the editor after RFC then
I am sure there are archives to check on such things.

> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf
> Of Eastlake III Donald-LDE008
> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 3:28 PM
> To: [email-masked]

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 21:58:36 +0100

> not placed on RFCs at all?

This comes up repeatedly.
I wonder why.

Some people are given money by the employers for IETF work.
Some aren't.
If you don't care about the input from these people, go on with this 
proposal.
They are usually academics and thus by definition have no idea about 
real networks anyway.

Gruesse, Carsten

---

From: "James Luciani" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:07:00 -0500

Theoretical as well as founding principles of IETF have it that we are
individuals in WGs.  I am not claiming that this is the reality but rather
that this is part of the list of things (like that trite saying about Kings
etc.) that we use as guidance in our thought processes today.

> From: Carsten Bormann [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 3:59 PM
> To: James Luciani
> Cc: Carsten Bormann; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: Formalizing Design Teams
>
>