Subject: Editorship of p6-caching

From: Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 12:35:07 +1000

As some of you are aware, I was behind the major rewrite of p6-caching  
in the -06 revision. At that time, my intent was to help out the  
editors with a one-time contribution, which I'd hand over to them and  
then step away from.

Since then it's become apparent that the rewrite still needs work  
(e.g., <http://www.w3.org/mid/[email-masked] 
 >). After discussing this with the editors and our AD, I think the  
best thing to do moving forward is for me to become an editor on that  
document, so that I can continue to make editorial contributions and  
tweaks.

However, this would necessitate some changes to avoid conflict of  
interest (apparent or real). One of the roles a WG chair performs is  
to "shepherd" the documents through the IESG process once they enter  
Last Call (RFC4858), and part of the shepherding process is pointing  
out places where there was contention in the WG or disagreement with  
the state of the document.

Since an editor has so much control over what goes into the document,  
it would be inappropriate for me to both edit and shepherd that  
document. To avoid this, Mark Baker has volunteered to shepherd that  
document, once it enters Last Call.

To be clear -- this would only apply to p6-caching, and I would still  
determine consensus for that document during the WG process. I very  
much intend to wear the different hats separately and prominently, and  
would rely on WG members to remind me of this should any apparent  
conflict surface.

Absent any serious concerns expressed by the community, we'll  
implement this for draft -07, which I expect to be out before  
Stockholm. If we go ahead and concerns do sprout up down the road,  
I'll be quite willing to step away from the document again to allow us  
to move forward.

Kind regards and many thanks to Mark for allowing himself to be  
volunteered,

--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2009 09:49:22 +0200

Mark Nottingham wrote:
> ...
> Since an editor has so much control over what goes into the document, it 
> would be inappropriate for me to both edit and shepherd that document. 
> To avoid this, Mark Baker has volunteered to shepherd that document, 
> once it enters Last Call.
> ...

For the record: I think that's the Right Thing to do. It's great that 
Mark, with all his Caching Know-How has been working on Part 6, and the 
specification should say so. And he should be able to continue with it.

BR, Julian