RE: how to resolve the i-d nits question

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

So I have the action item to work on this and come up
with proposed revision of IDNITs and other related 
actions to take. 

Thanks,
Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Bellovin [mailto:smb@research.att.com]
> Sent: woensdag 30 april 2003 19:00
> To: iesg@ietf.org
> Subject: how to resolve the i-d nits question
> 
> 
> We need to separate the nits into three categories:
> 
> 	a) readability by the community
> 		This includes things like table of contents for long
> 		documents, page breaks, reasonable conformance to
> 		line lengths, etc.
> 
> 		Suggested process: wg chairs and/or ADs apply gentle
> 		persuasion to fix offending documents, early on.
> 
> 	b) needed by the IESG
> 		Mostly the content issues, plus table of contents
> 
> 		Suggested process: summary rejection by the
> 		sponsoring AD
> 
> 	c) needed by the RFC editor
> 		Things that are hard to fix formatting, or are
> 		error-prone then, such as long-line ASCII art,
> 		hyphenated works, etc.  The copyright boilerplate
> 		has to be in an acceptable form; it can't legally
> 		be added by someone else.  Normative/informative
> 		split helps the community by speeding up publication,
> 		but people don't realize it.
> 
> 		Suggested process: summary rejection by the RFC
> 		editor or the IESG, depending on who gets there
> 		first.
> 
> I suggest that some <AD, RFCeditor> pair try to split the 
> current list 
> into those categories.
> 
> 
> 		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me)
> 		http://www.wilyhacker.com (2nd edition of 
> "Firewalls" book)
> 
>