[ih] Karl's post from Friday: Re: Interop as part of Internet History

[Dave Crocker]

On 9/14/2020 6:55 PM, Brian E Carpenter via Internet-history wrote:
> Dave,
> 
> The example you quote was a bit of an oddball since it was
> explicitly trying to change the way documents *in the IETF stream*
> used the English language. I don't think that is what we are
> are discussing here.


Sorry, no.

All of the streams produce RFCs that contain normative language.  (OK, 
maybe the IAB stream doesn't, but IRTF, ISE and IETF certainly do.)

So, forgive me, but our draft wasn't specific to the IETF.

As for 'change' it was trying to offer advice for avoiding ambiguity, 
with better vocabulary separation.  As I said, I later realized we had 
some normative language in there, but I considered that an error.  That 
probably demonstrated the need we were trying to address far better than 
I'd wished...


Ultimately, since there was no opportunity for actual discussion, there 
also was no opportunity for altering the document to permit it to 
address concerns.

But again, my point for the thread here was that there is serious 
editorial filtering in the ISE, and it isn't always simple to predict 
what it will be.

d/
-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net