Folks, I want to apologize in advance for opening exactly the sort of issue that I said editors shouldn't open. Dino's proposed changes to 04 include some changes that have not been discussed on the WG list, some of which have process or other problems. In an ideal world, I'd have some textual proposal explaining what the issue is and why it's a good idea to enter into the tracker and then I'd follow up with a comment discussing my concerns as chair. However, I don't actually have that text and suspect for some of these issues the text doesn't exist. So, I'm combining both my iferred description of the issue along with my concerns as chair into a single message. I'd appreciate comments on how I could have handled this better, although it's probably best to send those comments privatly so as not to clutter up the list. Sorry for breaking my own advice here. --Sam
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.