Hi Dave,
Dave Crocker wrote:
>
> At 09:02 AM 12/18/1999 , Peter Deutsch wrote:
> >To revisit a theme I raised back in the summer, this need to be able to
> >prove prior art is the reason I believe we need to preserve Internet
> >Drafts, not just mailing lists and other work output from the IETF. I'm
> >all for protecting innovation, and believe patents have a role in this
> >industry, but I've seen a few bogus claims and am happy to do my bit to
> >see them struck down. They tend to fall fairly easily if you have access
> >to suitable examples of prior art.
>
> Hmm, that makes two of us who have tried to pursue this. It is currently
> extremely difficult for research about prior art to access the treasure
> trove of IETF discussion and development. Essentially, you have to know
> exactly what you want, by name. A searchable, permanent archive would be
> simple and incredibly useful.
I recall that the general attitude when this was last discussed was that
preserving drafts was evil, although personally I wasn't convinced. At
the same time, Iit turned out I was at least partially wrong on the
mailing list issue - as Steve Coya pointed out, they are now archived.
The problem is that this collection isn't complete, and the mail is just
dumped into one place. A systemic archiving of all work out (such as
drafts, agendas, charters, etc) and a few other simple steps could make
the job easier. The problem seems to be that this archival role isn't
seem as important and/or appropriate by some at the IETF.
</opinion>
- peterd
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
"Skill without imagination is craftsmanship and gives us many
useful objects, such as wickerwork baskets. Imagination
without skill gives us modern art...
- Tom Stoppard
-----------------------------------------------------------------
