Mirja Kuehlewind \(IETF\) <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, that’s “extends” and “amends” is a different case; that’s why we > have two tags. Defining the tags does not remove the need or > requirement to provide clear text. The draft says that but we could use > even more strong language or add more concrete guidance if there is > consensus for that. I would definitely be will to work on > that. However, getting text in each draft consistently seems even more > difficult to achieve. Also because some people have strong options > about what the “updates” tag should NOT be used for but we definitely > don’t have a way to enforce that currently.
Joel identified two possible understanding of Amends.
If we had 5-6 categories of historical use of Updates, and it turned out that
2-3 of those uses were inappropriate/wrong/worth-never-repeating... I would
not have a problem with having some term for those wrong uses.
Even if the word is "Wrong-Update-134", with a definition.
{think: _Wrong Hordak_ for ND Stevenson She-Ra reboot fans...}
Such that we could put this into the meta-data for those documents where did
recognize we did it wrong.
> Also, having text might help the problem on how it is interpreted by
> the reader/implementor, however it will not help with the re-occurring
> (useless) discussions about when to use of not use the “updates”
> tag. Again I don’t think we can define the new tags in a way that we
> don’t have any discussion at anymore but at least the discussion will
> be based on some definitions and I expect to have less discussions.
Agreed!
I think that it would be brilliant if an AD review told the WG:
"Yeah, that document is not an Updates-123, it's an Updates-545, right?"
WG: Oh yeah, we didn't change our meta-data as our I-D evolved into being
better at interoperating with old thing FOO.
> Also my question is what’s the harm I trying it. If it doesn’t help, we
> stop it again. However, I think there is a chance to at least improve
> the situation even though we might not fix all issues entirely.
+1
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
** My working hours and your working hours may be different. **
** Please do not feel obligated to reply outside your normal working hours **
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- rswg mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
