On 7/4/24 8:15 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote:
Paul Kyzivat <pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu> writes:
I just reviewed one [document of a cluster]. And this isn't the first
time I've reviewed [one] of a cluster like this.
It bothers me that he genart/artart reviews of the documents in such a
cluster don't take the related nature of the documents in a cluster.
Conversely, since Genart reviews are to provide "fresh eyes" on a
document, there is a special value to reviewing just one document of a
cluster: Is it comprehensible in isolation?
In my experience they often aren't. I often must read a few key
references to have enough context to review the document at hand.
(Whether a cluster or not.)
I agree having a separate genart reviewer for each document in a cluster
gets more eyes on them. It might be helpful if the various genart
reviewers compared notes. But timing and coordination could be tricky.
In the end the WG will end up seeing all the reviews and can reconcile
them if necessary. And the genart reviewers receive copies of the other
reviews of the cluster on the genart list. Maybe that is enough.
Thanks,
Paul
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list -- gen-art@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to gen-art-le...@ietf.org
