Should there be provision in this naming scheme
for the merging of two individual drafts into
one wg draft ?
Regards
Marshall Eubanks
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 19:14:51 -0800
Dave Crocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:59:19 +0000, Dave Singer wrote:
> > a) renaming of the root portion of the file-name is permitted, nay
> >
> > encouraged, to identify whether the draft is currently individual, or
> > owned by a group (or even to select a 'better' name for other
> > reasons);
> > b) the revision number is NOT reset when the name is otherwise changed;
> > c) all drafts must include a revision history including the full name
> > under which each draft was presented.
>
>
> this is in line with some other postings, and I think it is quite a good
> summary. retaining
> version history is a nice touch.
>
> in terms of naming, I think syntactically it reduces to:
>
>
> I-D-Name = "draft-" owner "-" category "=" title "-" version
>
> owner = author-name / "ietf"
> ; who retains change control
>
> author-name = { last name of first author }
>
> category = working-group / topic
>
> working-group = { IETF working group }
>
> topic = { term under which I-D topic fits}
>
> title = { text specific to this I-D, to describe it }
>
>
> * Version 0 must be submitted some extra amount of time before an IETF
> meeting.
>
> * Use of the working group name is authorized by the working group chair and
> represents an
> explicit hand-off of change-control for the document, to the IETF.
>
> * If a working group goes defunct, prior to RFC publication of the I-D,
> "ownership" reverts to
> the authors.
> d/
>
>
>
>
> d/
> --
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> +1.408.246.8253
> dcrocker a t ...
> WE'VE MOVED to: www.bbiw.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
