Re: [BEHAVE] adopt draft-van-beijnum-behave-ftp64-06 as WG item

["Dan Wing" <dwing at cisco.com>]

> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Dan Wing <dwing at cisco.com> wrote:
> >> On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 10:59:35PM +0800, Kai Ju wrote:
> >> > jiang sheng's pre condition is quite clear, by including
> >> > other author, this draft could be adopted.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure how our Chairs prefer to work these matters, 
> but it is my
> >> understanding that the editors of a draft which is to be a 
> WG product
> >> normally serve at the pleasure of the Chairs.  Therefore, I don't
> >> believe the WG participants are in a position to insist on one or
> >> another editor for the draft as a condition of making it a WG work
> >> item.  "Is the _draft_ to be worked on by the WG?" is the 
> question, as
> >> I understand it.  The Chairs might well decide that 
> someone previously
> >> entirely unconnected to this effort will hold the pen, and that's
> >> something they get to choose after the WG has expressed its
> >> willingness to adopt the work item.
> >
> > Yes, the question at hand is 'shall we adopt this document'.  I
> > did not ask 'who wants to be an author'.
> >
> > I have not seen a substantive objection since I asked a week ago
> > (Oct 22).
> 
> Note that i raised some questions and do not think the current draft
> is a solid basis, although chairs do not think they are fundamental
> issues.

Yes, I made note of the comments, and as I indicated in my reply
they can be corrected.  Documents are not perfect -- or complete --
when adopted by the working group.  Once the working group adopts
the document, the working group has change control over the 
document and can direct the authors to make the changes the WG
deems necessary.

> I do not know what can be a 'fundamental' issue.  Thanks.

For example, the technique described in the document will 
not work as expected / desired.

-d