Subject: [Tools-discuss] draft name changes

From: Ed Jankiewicz <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 17:19:22 -0400

just for the suggestion box, I'm sure it overfloweth...

for the IETF Documents tool, consider adding a link when a draft name 
changes (e.g. an individual draft is adopted as a working group item), 
similar to the link from a draft to its publication as an RFC.  It would 
be nice to see that 
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-vandevelde-v6ops-ra-guard-01 didn't 
just expire, but lived on as 
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-ra-guard-00 for example.

-- 
Ed Jankiewicz - SRI International
Fort Monmouth Branch Office - IPv6 Research 
Supporting DISA Standards Engineering Branch
732-389-1003 or  [email-masked] 

_______________________________________________
Tools-discuss mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 21:22:08 +0200

Hi Ed,

> just for the suggestion box, I'm sure it overfloweth...

Oh, the suggesion box is doing fine, it's the pending box which is the
big problem...

> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-ra-guard-00 for example.

Right, good point and good idea.  One problem is that there's a lot of
missing information about which document replaces which.  I'm going to
try to synthethisise that using Lars Eggert's idea -- should have put
that in place some time ago, but no time...

Anyway.  I've added this now, and the replaced-by links should appear if
the replaced-by information is available.

Best,

	Henrik

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 22:02:19 +0200

> the replaced-by information is available.

Would it be useful if the xml2rfc format captured that information somehow?

BR, Julian

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 23:53:16 +0200

Hi Julian,

> Would it be useful if the xml2rfc format captured that information somehow?

Mmm.  I'm not sure.

The intention has been that when we have Bill's rewrite of the draft
submission tool deployed, we should consider adding fields in the form
to capture information like this.  

Capturing it in the xml2rfc format would mostly be appropriate if xml2rfc
also had an option to render it in a standard way in the draft itself.
For drafts which are submitted with an accompanying xml file it would be
possible to pre-populate the replaced-by field in the submission meta-data
verification page based on a replaced-by indication in the xml file, but
it would never be a complete solution which could do away with the form
field.  So once the metadata verification page of the submission tool has
a field for 'replaced-by', having it also in the .xml file would make
things a bit easier for xml2rfc users.  Before then I think it would not
make a big difference, I think.

(Detour...:)

The question made me start to wonder how large a percentage of drafts are
now being submitted with an accompanying .xml file, and a quick check gave
a figure of about 28% for 2008 to date.  The distribution of .xml, .txt
and .pdf drafts over the years were as follows a moment ago, according to
the archive on one of the tools servers:

23:46 /www/tools.ietf.org/id
henrik@merlot $ ls -l | grep draft-.*\.xml$ | field 6 | cut -c 1-4 | sort -n | uniq -c | bargraph
     16 2006   1% 
    445 2007  30% ***************************
    979 2008  67% ************************************************************

   1440 Tota 
  480.0 Aver  33% =============================

23:47 /www/tools.ietf.org/id
henrik@merlot $ ls -l | grep draft-.*\.txt$ | field 6 | cut -c 1-4 | sort -n | uniq -c | bargraph
    140 1992   0% *
      8 1993   0% 
    203 1994   0% **
    704 1995   1% ********
   1401 1996   2% ****************
   1688 1997   3% *******************
   2891 1998   5% **********************************
   2688 1999   5% *******************************
   3402 2000   6% ****************************************
   4527 2001   8% *****************************************************
   4835 2002   9% *********************************************************
   4861 2003   9% *********************************************************
   4755 2004   9% ********************************************************
   4932 2005   9% **********************************************************
   5069 2006  10% ************************************************************
   4953 2007   9% **********************************************************
   3421 2008   6% ****************************************

  50478 Tota 
 2969.3 Aver   5% ===================================

23:48 /www/tools.ietf.org/id
henrik@merlot $ ls -l | grep draft-.*\.pdf$ | field 6 | cut -c 1-4 | sort -n | uniq -c | bargraph
     25 2002   8% **********************
     48 2003  15% ******************************************
     31 2004   9% ***************************
     28 2005   9% *************************
     67 2006  21% ************************************************************
     67 2007  21% ************************************************************
     45 2008  14% ****************************************

    311 Tota 
   44.4 Aver  14% =======================================

Regards,

	Henrik

---

From: Tony Hansen <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 20:40:28 -0400

IMO, the internet-drafts upload tool should be capturing this information.

If you put in a name that ends in -00 and it's a draft-ietf name, it
should practically require the name of the I-D that is being replaced.
It's fairly probable that a WG document will have starte as a personal doc.

It's not just -00's that can replace other docs. I've had several docs
where a couple different drafts by different authors were merged into
one of the document streams.

	Tony Hansen
	[email-masked]

---

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 10:16:18 +0300

Tony,

> IMO, the internet-drafts upload tool should be capturing this information.

Yes.

> It's fairly probable that a WG document will have starte as a personal doc.

Right.

Jari