On Tue, Jun 23, 2026 at 11:29 PM Eliot Lear <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 24.06.2026 00:32, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > > Third, applying these practices only to the published RFC, as > principle 2 states (assuming ad arguendo that these practices are > good) seems to me to have quite confusing and undesirable results. > > How so? > If we assume that it's good for documents to (for instance) acknowledge AI usage, then it's quite odd to only expect them to do so once they become RFCs.
The RSWG has no mandate to modify Internet-Drafts, though maybe they should. > I agree that they don't, and as indicated in my previous message, this limitation just seems to be directed towards keeping this document within the scope of RSWG. However, the better approach would be to bring this to a venue with the right scope, which is to say to the streams. -Ekr
-- rswg mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
