Ross Callon wrote:
If the process, tools, responsibility and incentives for IESG Approval are unchanged, then I believe this editor cycle would not materially reduce the number of issues found by the IESG. Like code, one can always find more bugs. And the importance of a "bug" always looms large in the eye of the finder.I agree. Professional staff can be very good at finding editorial / grammatical problems. However, the RFC editor's staff already does a good job of this, and I don't think that these are the sorts of issuesthat are causing delays in IESG review of documents.
If the RFC editor will find these errors, then I suggest to move their
review to an earlier stage and/or instruct the IESG to focus on the
content, not editorial issues.
Henk
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net
RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.amsterdamned.org/~henk
P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414
1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445
The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no
hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily.