Subject: [avtext] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-avtext-rtp-grouping-taxonomy-07: (with COMMENT)

From: "Alvaro Retana" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2015 04:02:24 -0700

Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-avtext-rtp-grouping-taxonomy-07: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-avtext-rtp-grouping-taxonomy/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

While I won't stand in the way of publishing this document, I think that
it may be better suited to live on in a Wiki where it can be updated in a
more fluent fashion.  I didn't get a particularly warm fuzzy feeling from
phrases like these: "This document provides *some* clarity..." or "For
each concept *an attempt is made*...".  That text can be made firmer, but
the point remains: it is probable that the concepts could be refined and
the taxonomy may evolve.

---

From: "Ben Campbell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2015 08:47:54 -0500

Thanks for the comment.

One reason for this to be published as an RFC is that it establishes 
terminology that other drafts will use. A wiki would not work as well as 
a long-term stable reference for those.

I agree with you on the "attempt is made" sort of language.

Ben.