Subject: DHCID RR draft status?

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 19:23:27 -0700

The last I saw of this was a laundry list of suggestions forwarded
to the list by Randy, many of which didn't seem to me to be
terribly important, and some of which actually seemed wrong, followed
by a message from Mark Stapp that responded to only one of these
objections, and then silence.

I am not convinced that all the points Randy mentioned need to be
fixed - Randy did not appear to be willing to act as an advocate
for those points, and apparently the people who made these points
to him privately aren't willing to advocate them publicly. Are we
ready to go to PS now, or not?   If not, why not?   What is the
next step that needs to be taken, and who needs to take it?

to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.

---

From: Erik Nordmark <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:33:45 +0100 (CET)

If I recall correctly most of the points that Randy forwarded seemed to
be of the nature "the document would be more clear if X".

There is a range of approaches for dealing with such comments; from arguing
that the document is clear enough and the changes aren't needed to
an approach of suggesting and interating on language that makes the spec
clearer in the eyes of the reader.

I think the first end of the range is far from ideal since it sends the
message that comments asking for clarifications are not openly invited
but instead are ignored or rejected. That doesn't help us produce
clear specifications.

When I've been an author I've found something closer to the other end of the
range work quite well - making sure that I understand what the reader thinks
is unclear and trying to figure out ways to clarify things.
That approach also seems to result in folks continuing to be interested in
asking for clarifications in the spec, which is the only way I know to
produce clear specifications.

So if I was concerned about getting a clear specification finished rapidly
I know which path I'd take :^)

   Erik

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 02:43:29 -0700

> but instead are ignored or rejected. That doesn't help us produce

I agree with you up to a point, and that is the attitude that I try to 
maintain when writing
drafts, but I have also found that there is always a change that you can 
make to any
document to make it clearer, so if your algorithm is to persist in updating 
the document
until nobody can think of any way to make it clearer, the document never 
goes to PS.

What I would really appreciate is that if any of the comments Randy 
forwarded along
appeal to Mark as reasonable changes to make, he make them, quickly, and 
resubmit
the draft.   And then, unless somebody comes up with a showstopper, we go 
to PS.
As an incentive for the WG, if we can make this happen, I promise that I 
won't get up
and grumble about this draft again in Salt Lake City.