OPEN ISSUE: Standards Track

[Basavaraj.Patil at nokia.com]

> 
> > It's equally well an illustration that we can't boil
> > the ocean over and over again -- especially with new
> > people every time.  We need to boil a few gallons first,
> > and then a few truckloads.
> 
> This is a _really_ good point.   One of the things that I've 
> seen cause major hassle and pain for people who've been working on a draft for a 
> while is that someone new comes along (it's been me! :') and asks the 
> same damned questions that got answered *last* year.   And 
> then someone else comes along a week later and does the same thing.   :'}
> 
> Incremental steps would really help with this (although of 
> course in my case the questions I was asking were extremely pertinent. :')
> 

This is bound to happen when you have documents that take a couple of
years or more and umpteen revisions. Obviously churn among WG members
participating is also a fact. The only effective way is to track
issues and maintain that. Asking the newbies to go and read the archives
is not the most effective (especially when you have extemely active MLs). 
But a list of issues that have been dealt with by the WG during the course 
of n revisions over time will alleviate the pain ;) of revisiting the issue(s).

-Basavaraj