|
So Jari, do you see it a failure if authors/editors interact
with the ADs and the
people who raise issues concerns? As far as I am concerned,
when that
happens in a timely fashion, then I am happy when
shepherding.
If it does not happen quick enough, then I try to stimulate
interaction.
When shepherding, I also keep an eye on the discussion to try
and
determine if the resulting edits are changing what the WG had
consensus
on, and in that case I would steer that discussion to the WG
to make
sure that the WG is in agreement.
Don't overload the shepherd with things that seem to be
working.
Bert
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 12:14
PM
Subject: Re: PROTO Process
I wanted to expand a little bit on what Russ was
saying.
In my experience, the part of PROTO that is currently working
is the
write-ups. When it comes to the shepherding of the document through
issues raised in last call, directorate, and IESG reviews, the authors
and the responsible/discussing ADs seem to be most active in responding,
explaining, suggesting text changes, etc. There are notable exceptions
-- you know who you are -- but in many cases the shepherds are
relatively silent. Is this a correct perception of the reality? And if
it is, is it a desirable state of affairs or something that should be
changed?
Jari
|