So, I haven't seen any comments.
Either that means everybody is 100% happy with the draft and we should adopt it
immediately, or nobody is interested and we should just drop it. Which is it to
be?
Regards/Ngā mihi
Brian
On 23-Apr-26 17:04, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Heavily updated following many comments...
The main points were to make it clear that stream policies always win, and I
added a minimal section on dispute resolution.
More comments please!
Brian
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-rswg-authoring-ethics-01.txt
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2026 21:55:26 -0700
From: [email protected]
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Internet-Draft draft-carpenter-rswg-authoring-ethics-01.txt is now available.
Title: Ethical aspects of RFC authorship
Author: Brian E. Carpenter
Name: draft-carpenter-rswg-authoring-ethics-01.txt
Pages: 11
Dates: 2026-04-22
Abstract:
This document describes guidelines for assigning authorship in RFC
documents, including guidelines for disclosing the use of artificial
intelligence during document preparation. It also discusses the
related issues of acknowledgements, editors and contributors. The
various RFC streams may set their own guidelines, which will have
priority.
The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-carpenter-rswg-authoring-ethics/
There is also an HTML version available at:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-carpenter-rswg-authoring-ethics-01.html
A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-carpenter-rswg-authoring-ethics-01
Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at:
rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
--
rswg mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
