Subject: RE: [Tools-discuss] RE: Mangled Internet-Drafts

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 10:40:34 +0200

Alex,

> Unless we have misjudged IETF feelings, it looks like every major IETF  
> tool would have to have an email interface if such interface is  
> technically possible. Perhaps we should place scary-looking ASCII-drawn  
> wolves in our signatures to convince IETFers to stay away from email draft  
> submissions? :-)

Often, I do work on drafts while while traveling - so I have no connectivity.
I can finish a draft and 'send' it, even if I don't have connectivity.  That
way, next time I connect, the draft gets sent.  In many cases, after a flight,
I may get stuck behind dial-up or GPRS and having to upload via a webpage can
be problematic.

I would rather submit drafts by email than by webpages.

John

---

From: "Alex Rousskov" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 08:56:06 -0700

> I would rather submit drafts by email than by webpages.

John,

	As I have stated in my response to Paul, the Tools team is very aware  
that many people prefer email submission. That is why both email and web  
interfaces are to be supported.

	Personally, I believe that off-line submission convenience is less  
important than submission quality, and that the later is much easier to  
monitor and improve with interactive web interface.
However, I am not going to jeopardize the fate of the ID submission tool  
by trying to force IETFers to do what I think is right. This is not the  
fight worth fighting, IMO. Again, the ID Submission draft requires both  
email and web interfaces to be supported.

Thanks,

Alex.