Hi Brian, On 22/04/18 06:31, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > However, WG adoption doesn't imply accepting the contents, only > the topic. Actually it transforms the authors from independent actors > into servants of the WG. So from a formal viewpoint Stephen is wrong: > the WG can decide to completely change the scope and viewpoint of the > draft, even if the authors disagree.
I agree that you are formally correct - once adopted the WG can change a document according to WG consensus despite an author's disagreement etc. However, I figure in practice it's way better if a document has the right scope before being adopted - I think our processes work much better in that latter situation and are prone to generating heat and not light in situations like the former;-) And in this case, Juan-Carlos' mail was specifically a call for adoption of this document, (at the author's behest), so I do think the right answer here is "no" to adoption. And to then have discussion about whether there's a usefully scoped bit of work that includes what this draft discusses. Cheers, S.
0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
