RE: ID-NITS on: draft-smith-urn-mpeg-01.txt

[Bob Braden <braden@ISI.EDU>]

  *> 
  *> One of our concerns is that we have a number of things on our ID-NITs
  *> list that are more "nice to adhere too, but if you don't, then RFc-Editor
  *> has no trouble with it and can easily fix it in their editing process.
  *> 
Bert,

It is unclear to me why this should be an intense concern of the IESG,
given the very real concerns that the IESG has about the ongoing work
of the IETF.

  *> We need to get to an ID-NITs list about which we are serious and whcih we 
  *> are willing to enforce. My effort this weekend was to check all I-Ds on 
  *> out agenda for ID-NITs issues (but be carefull, I am not claiming that I
  *> found all possible nits).

  *> 
  *> Hope this explains,

No, it befuddles me. The advantage of I-Ds is that, as ephemeral
documents, they can afford a loose definition of formatting.  It sounds
like you are changing that model, and we would question the wisdom of
this.  Is the IESG planning to take on the editorial job that the RFC
Editor has been doing for many years?  Is there a real problem here
that you are trying to solve?

  *> >   *> 
  *> >   *> Need to expand URN and MPEG in title
  *> > 
  *> > It was our judgment that URN and MPEG are so widely known that they
  *> > do not need expansion in the title, but we are happy to get feedback
  *> > on this issue.
  *> > 
  *> Well... see that is some of the problems we have with the policy of
  *> no Acronyms in the title. It is pretty subjective as to what one 
  *> assume is well known and what is not. Or so I think.
  *> 

Yes, like much of the editorial process, up to and including the
placement of commas and the addition of whitespace, it is s subjective
judgment call.  Designing a protocol or writing code also involves
thousands of subjective judgments; that is the nature of the world.
The RFC Editor has been providing editorial judgments about RFCs; in
a real sense that is what we have been paid to do.  We are always open
to input, but on the whole we think we have established a reasonable
record of good judgment.

Bob Braden

  *> Bert
  *> > Bob Braden, for the RFC Editor
  *> > 
  *> >   *> 
  *> >   *> Thanks,
  *> >   *> Bert 
  *> >   *> 
  *> > 
  *>