Session Date/Time: 09 Nov 2023 10:45

rswg Meeting Minutes

Summary

The rswg meeting focused on clarifying the distinction between RSWG policy and RPC practice. The discussion centered around three key questions designed to help determine which issues require formal policy and which can be left to the discretion of the RPC. A major theme emerged of trusting the RPC to make informed judgments, with the RSWG providing guidance and support.

Key Discussion Points

Policy vs. Practice: Defining the line between what constitutes RSWG policy (requiring formal documentation) and RPC practice (operational decisions).
Trust in the RPC: A strong sentiment emerged favoring trusting the RPC to make informed decisions based on their expertise and understanding of the community's needs.
The Role of RSWG: The group debated whether RSWG's primary function is to define policy or to provide support and guidance to the RPC. It was suggested that the group should document community-wide objectives.
XML Schema Evolution: Discussions included whether the RPC is required to update XML schemas for published RFCs in various scenarios, ranging from bug fixes to new tool releases. The consensus leaned towards allowing the RPC to use its judgment.
Impact of Changes: Concerns were raised about the impact of changes on RFC readers and the need for stability. A general agreement was reached that changes should be minimized and implemented carefully.
Alternative Outputs: The group discussed the possibility of the IETF producing outputs other than RFCs, such as structured data or executable code.
Accessibility: Accessibility of RFCs was identified as an objective needing attention.

Decisions and Action Items

Consensus on RPC Judgment: The group reached a consensus that the RPC should be empowered to use its judgment in making decisions related to RFC publication and maintenance.
Documenting Consensus: The chairs will draft a document outlining the consensus reached regarding the relationship between RSWG policy and RPC practice.
Scheduling: The group decided to revert to the normal working group schedule. Leaders will discuss scheduling an open slot.
Parallelization: Robert Sparks declared that the working group should work on blocked items such as accessibility issues and postal codes in parallel so they don't block the group's progress.

Next Steps

The chairs will circulate a draft document summarizing the discussion and the agreed-upon principles for separating policy and practice.
The RSAP will begin progressing documents related to accessibility, maffinl, SPG, and postal codes.
Continue discussions on broader architectural issues and alternative IETF outputs.