Re: Atompub WG activity (Last Call: draft-ietf-atompub-protocol to Proposed Standard)

[Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de>]

Julian Reschke schrieb:
> Robert Sayre schrieb:
> > > The IESG has received a request from the Atom Publishing Format and 
> > > Protocol WG (atompub) to consider the following document:
> > >
> > > - 'The Atom Publishing Protocol '
> > >    <draft-ietf-atompub-protocol-14.txt> as a Proposed Standard
> >
> > By my count, draft-ietf-atompub-protocol-14.txt has generated over 250 
> > on-topic comments on the WG list since March 06, when the version was 
> > announced. It is clearly not ready for publication. I don't think it 
> > is appropriate for the IETF as a whole to review this document.
>
> + 0,5.
>
> The document got lots of constructive feedback in the previous weeks 
> (mainly due to fresh eyes), and I think it would be worthwhile to 
> resolve most of the issues that were raised before doing the Last Call. 
> This will save lots of time spent by new reviewers raising new issues.

I guess I need to rephrase that...

The important thing is that there's quite a number of changes that 
should be applied to draft-ietf-atompub-protocol-14.txt, some editorial, 
some clarifications, and potentially at least one normative change.

We need to make sure that these changes are properly executed, and be 
reviewed before publication. In general, I'm very nervous with changes 
done *after* Last Call, because they frequently are not as well reviewed 
as they should be. If we can make sure that this doesn't happen here, 
it's ok to go on.

That being said, two weeks of LC aren't exactly long, but I trust the 
IESG to do the right thing here :-)

Best regards, Julian

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