OPEN ISSUE: Standards Track

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand]

--On 16. mai 2003 07:32 -0400 Margaret Wasserman <mrw at windriver.com> wrote:

> When documents are reviewed, it would be useful if we could
> get two types of (clearly delineated) feedback:
>
>          (1) Blocking issues that would prevent the publication
>                  of the document at PS.  In the opinion of the
>                  reviewer (currently the IESG), it is worth
>                  delaying publication of the document to fix
>                  this problem.
>          (2) Non-blocking issues that should be fixed in the
>                  next revision (and certainly before the
>                  document goes to the next stage).
>
> Right now, any issue raised by the IESG (through a DISCUSS) is
> treated as a blocking issue.

The IESG tries to distinguish between blocking issues (DISCUSS comments) 
and non-blocking issues ("if the document is revised for other reasons, you 
might want to look at this too").
This will be made even more explicit in the upcoming more-automated process 
for IESG opininon-gathering.

But - for instance quite a few of the "I-D Nits" are regarded as blocking 
issues (like "too many authors" or "formatting of code samples is broken" 
or "ABNF does not pass syntax check"). So a DISCUSS doesn't necessarily 
mean that it's an important architectural issue - just that it's something 
that, in the IESG's opinion, has to be fixed before publication.

                      Harald