On Tue, Feb 18, 2025, at 10:46, Bob Hinden wrote: > I am interpreting the intent here as having someone who will speak for > the consumers of RFCs in discussions differently from the IETF > participants. Not sure “represent” is the right word, but I think the > goal is to express the needs and interests.
Here, I think that this is where I agree with Ekr. We should not rely on any one party to act as a representative. That's not how we do it on the web. There is a well established rule (the "priority of constituencies" if you want the grandiose name) that says that end users are most important. Everyone involved in that process is a web user, but we all recognize that no one involved can speak for all web users. We accept that and simply say that it is a shared responsibility -- for all involved in the process -- to consider end user needs when making choices. I don't see why we can't do the same here. Don't assign any single entity that responsibility, but make it a shared one. -- rswg mailing list -- rswg@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to rswg-le...@rfc-editor.org
