Subject: [core] Reordering authorship list on RD

From: Jaime Jiménez <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 18:40:22 +0300

Dear RD authors,

During today's CoRE interim it was brought up the excellent work Christian
has been doing for quite some time on the resource directory draft. 

Thus the chairs would like to propose to reshuffle the authorship list
and place Christian as first document author. 

Ciao!
-- Marco and Jaime

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 17:49:51 +0200

> and place Christian as first document author. 

(Maintaining editor role, I presume.)

+1

Grüße, Carsten

---

From: Michael Koster <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 08:51:34 -0700

Agree,  +1

Michael
> On Oct 8, 2020, at 8:49 AM, Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]> wrote:
>

---

From: Jaime Jiménez <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 18:58:55 +0300

>(Maintaining editor role, I presume.)

Marco and I were not sure about that part, as Christian has
also authored quite a large portion of the draft by now. 

IMO the authors and editor can decide.

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 18:14:59 +0200

> IMO the authors and editor can decide. 

Right.  RFC7322 is not very specific on what role=“editor” actually implies.
RFC 7749 and RFC 7991 are more specific :-)

   Note that this specification does not define a precise meaning for
   the term "editor”.

To me, this term implies overall responsibility for the document, while the other authors are only authors of specific parts or aspects of the document.  But others may think that editor ⇒ ¬ author, which I’m not subscribing to.

Right now Christian is qualified with role=“editor”, and I just wanted to say that we didn’t discuss changing that — we certainly could if we want.

Grüße, Carsten

---

From: Christian Amsüss <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 18:32:48 +0200

>    Note that this specification does not define a precise meaning for

FWIW, I'm understanding my editor role to reflect that my work on the
document is to primarily reflect the WG's decisions about the document,
or to take edits when no hard decisions are to be taken (and/or nobody
says anything). Topics I'm bringing in are brought up with a WG member
hat on (as issues or suggested changes), and as an editor I keep them at
a PR level unless there is some positive WG or author reaction.

An author's role is that of someone who brings in content before
adoption, or (altough I'm not sure whether that is formally covered)
advances the document without further WG consultation, to some point.
(If I did that, it was not my intention and, to an extent, a flaw in
performing the editor role).

With that, I (hope to) see the editor role reflected in my work here,
but (given it's wobbly terminology, and I probably shouldn't get a say
anyway) gladly accept either.

Thank you all
Christian

-- 
To use raw power is to make yourself infinitely vulnerable to greater powers.
  -- Bene Gesserit axiom

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 13:08:53 -0400

> To me, this term implies overall responsibility for the document, while the other authors are only authors of specific parts or aspects of the document.  But others may think that editor ⇒ ¬ author…

While there are cases where editors are brought in to finish documents, 
and have reasons they don't want to held responsible for the entire 
contents, in most cases, I think that editors >= authors in terms of 
what they contribute.

> Right now Christian is qualified with role=“editor”, and I just wanted to say that we didn’t discuss changing that — we certainly could if we want.

I think of this qualification is as being a superset.
Anyway, yes, I think it's a good idea.

---

From: Jaime Jiménez <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 12:35:34 +0300

Hi,

RFC7991 does say that the "editor" is a type of "author" too but indeed
the terminology is a bit wobbly.

I think both Marco and I would be happy with whichever alternative
you (authors & editor) choose. I think you can make the changes directly
on the repo as well.

Thank you!
Marco & Jaime.