It is difficult to read, because I am expecting a process and find something else,
I started to read, but got confused (stoped reading), why you are titling it as creating WG-draft and mentioning the adoption into the document. I understand that the creating first is *individual-draft* not *WG-draft*, the adoption happens after the creation of individual draft. If creating is WG creation, then it is already adopted as *idea* not *draft*, and then draft-00 is the WG-draft. I don't see the process clear at all, I maybe missing something, AB On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Adrian Farrel <adr...@olddog.co.uk> wrote: > Hi, > > Dave Crocker and I have this little draft [1] discussing the process and > considerations for creating formal working group drafts that are targeted > for publication. > > We believe that this may help clarify some of the issues and concerns > associated with this part of the process. We are targeting this as > Informational (i.e. commentary on existing process, not new normative > definition of process) and would like your input. > > What is not clear? > What have we got wrong? > How should we resolve the remaining editor notes? > > Thanks, > Adrian > (per pro Dave) > > [1] http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-crocker-id-adoption-02.txt > > >
