Subject: RE: draft-phillips-langtags-08, process, sp ecifications,

From: "Peter Constable" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 11:56:37 -0800

> From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>

> It occurs to me that a Last Call for an independent submission has an
added
> requirement to satisfy, namely that the community supports adoption of
the work.
> We take a working group as a demonstration of community support.

You say "the community", though surely a working group is only
representative of "a community" or a portion of "the community".

In this case, there is a least "a community", represented by members of
the IETF-anguages list.

> And, indeed, I haven't seen much support for the document under
discussion.

??!! If there wasn't much support, surely the discussion would have died
a few weeks ago shortly after it started.

Peter Constable

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 11:18:50 -0500

>>>>> "Peter" == Peter Constable <[email-masked]> writes:

    >> From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]> It occurs to me that a
    >> Last Call for an independent submission has an
    Peter> added
    >> requirement to satisfy, namely that the community supports
    Peter> the work.
    >> We take a working group as a demonstration of community

    Peter> You say "the community", though surely a working group is
    Peter> only representative of "a community" or a portion of "the
    Peter> community".

No.  The entire community reviews the chartering of the working group.

It's sort of complicated; community consensus does not appear to be
required by 3418 in order to form a working group, although I would
expect someone to appeal if a WG was formed and there was a rough
consensus against the formation of that group.

I do agree that individual submission last calls have greater latitude
than WG last calls.  I think that "Even though the WG supports this,
the IETF does not and thus we will not publish," is a valid outcome of
an IETF-wide last call.  IN practice it's harder to get that result than "The IETF does not support this individual submission; we will not publish."

Speaking only to general process and not to the issue at hand.