Spencer Dawkins wrote:
For the last several years, the working group chairs training has been ambiguous as to whether this is a good idea or not, leaning slightly toward "yes", because you lose continuity when you change the draft name and reset to revision 00. The real answer MAY BE "no", because no one will read it unless they click on it from the working group home page, so go ahead and change the name and revision number.
I have another argument for changing the name when a draft becomes a WG draft. It is a concrete marker of the transition of change-rights from the individual author(s) to the WG. In effect a document becomes a new thing when it becomes a WG document so a loss of continuity is, in effect, a good thing. Remembering also that the primary editorship can be handed over to another WG participant anytime in the continuing lifetime of the document it makes even less sense to keep the initial author's name in the title. a.