Re: Last Call: 'Proposed Experiment: Normative Format in Addition to ASCII Text' to Experimental RFC (draft-ash-alt-formats)

[Bob Braden <braden at ISI.EDU>]

Joel Halpern's comments (below) are right on  target.  However, Joel is 
rather too polite.

First, I must request that the Internet Draft be retracted in its present 
form.  Section 4
contains a direct quote from one of my messages.  However, the quoted 
sentence was taken
brazenly out of context; its sense is quite the opposite of the sense of my 
original
message. This is intolerable.  That kind of behavior may get you elected in 
the US ;-)
but it does not belong in the IETF.

Now, on to the substance.  As the author notes, there was indeed a replay 
of the usual
discussion about RFC formats in winter 2006.  The author says, "... the 
quite thoughtful,
extended, and detailed discussion ... resulted in no change".  There is a 
reason it did
not result in change... there were cogent arguments against all proposals 
that were
made. So, when it has no good ideas, the IETF randomly picks one of the bad 
ones?
That is apparently happening here.

How DID it get last called, by the way?  If I write up a arbitrary process 
experiment,
will the IESG automatically last call it?  Yummy.

The experiment picks on  two working groups and specifies that for one year 
it will
treat the results of these working groups differently from all other 
working group
output. How will a future implementor know which version is normative?  At 
present,
there is a simple rule... it is always the ASCII version.  If this exercise 
goes
ahead, some PDF files (which ones?) will be normative, and some ASCII
files won't.  This seems like a little hint that "process experiment" is not
a useful procedure for changing the fundamentals of standards publication
by the IETF.

Besides the misquote of myself, the I-D has some misleading examples of
bad ASCII art.  You cannot honestly prove that ASCII art is unusable
by abusing it.  I spent a few minutes cleaning up the terrible example
in the I-D (Sorry, I am in Washington and don't have ready access to
it; I will forward it when I get back.)

As Joel mentions, this experiment will have a negative impact on
RFC Editor throughput.  Shouldn't the IAB and perhaps the IAD
have some part in this?

For all the reasons that Joel said, plus the reasons I have given, I
request that the IESG reject this last call.  At the very least, the
base document needs more work, and the implications need
more mature thought.  And it seems to there is a badly broken
process lurking here.

I am somewhat astonished that the IESG chose to last call
'this document.

Bob Braden




At 03:15 PM 6/14/2006 -0400, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> I am personally skeptical about the value of the this experiment.
>
> I am concerned about the long term viability of this particular 
> format.  (I saw a recent note about a postscript document that supposedly 
> used only core features of postscript, but still could not be printed on a 
> modern printer.)
>
> I am also concerned that the document does not specify versions and 
> features.  I understand that people may have trouble knowing what versions 
> and features of PDF they are using, it is important to remember that PDF 
> is an active format, and I have seen reports that suitably arranged PDF 
> can carry content which causes harm.
>
> Another concern is that this increases the work on the RFC Editor.  After 
> performing the editing, and receiving the normative PDF, the RFC Editor 
> must carefully determine if it actually matches the agreed text 
> changes.  (Let us assume the author was trying in good faith to do 
> so.  Mistakes still get made.)  When the PDF was secondary to the text, 
> this was not as large a concern.
>
> Finally, this experiment will produce a set of RFCs which live forever 
> with the limitation that those RFCs do not have normative ASCII.  What if 
> we decide that this is a bad idea?  How do we fix it?
>
> Yours,
> Joel M. Halpern
>
> At 10:56 AM 6/14/2006, The IESG wrote:
> > The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the
> > following document:
> >
> > - 'Proposed Experiment: Normative Format in Addition to ASCII Text '
> >    <draft-ash-alt-formats-02.txt> as an Experimental RFC
> >
> > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> > final comments on this action.  Please send any comments to the
> > iesg at ietf.org or ietf at ietf.org mailing lists by 2006-07-12.
> >
> > The file can be obtained via
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ash-alt-formats-02.txt
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > IETF-Announce mailing list
> > IETF-Announce at ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf