Re: [yam] Proposed changes to review template

[SM <sm at resistor.net>]

Hi Chris,

This is a comment as an individual.

At 14:53 02-11-2009, Chris Newman wrote:
> Based on the IESG evaluation record of 
> draft-ietf-yam-rfc1652bis-pre-evaluation-00, I believe the questions 
> we asked the IESG were too terse and thus were not understood by the 
> IESG and did not accomplish our charter's stated goal for the pre-review.

If the WG want to accomplish the charter's stated goal, it will have 
to document the process experiment for the IESG to understand how it 
is going to work.  And the IESG has to agree to it.  We lose process 
agility when we get into all the details.

> I propose the latter two questions be expanded for future templates 
> as follows:

In theory, your proposal should help to get the work done.  It may 
have undesired effects which I won't get into.  Based on publicly 
available information, I doubt that the proposal would work as 
intended in practice.

Regards,
-sm