|Meeting Slides||RFC Series Oversight Committee (RSOC) (rfcedprog) IAB ASG|
|Other versions||plain text|
RFC SERIES OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE (RSOC) Minutes of the July 19, 2014 RSOC Retreat Reported by: Cindy Morgan, IETF Secretariat ATTENDEES --------------------------------- - Sarah Banks - Nevil Brownlee - Heather Flanagan (RSE, non-voting) - Joel Halpern (Lead) - Tony Hansen - Joe Hildebrand - Alexey Melnikov (Chair) - Cindy Morgan (Scribe) - Ray Pelletier (IAOC Liaison, non-voting) REGRETS --------------------------------- - Bob Hinden - Robert Sparks MINUTES --------------------------------- 1) Selection of the RSOC Chair After discussion, Alexey Melnikov agreed to continue as RSOC Chair for at least another 9 months. The RSOC will revisit this topic in March 2015. 2) RPC and the SLA Heather Flanagan reported that the RFC Production Center is not currently meeting the SLA, due to a number of reasons: - Large clusters of documents, totaling in hundreds of pages, were requested to be expedited. - There was a large surge of documents in March as outgoing Area Directors tried to clear their plates. - An experienced editor passed away in April. The RPC had already been trying to find an additional part-time editor, but hiring takes time, and currently it takes about 18 months for new editors to be fully trained and up-to-speed. The RSOC expressed surprise that the training and ramp-up time is so long for new editors. Joe Hildebrand noted that part of the issue is that the current RPC tooling is arcane; new tools are under development. Heather Flanagan asked that the tools consider when they are being written for engineers and when they are being written for editors. Joel Halpern asked if the situation is really as bad as it looks based on the SLA. Heather Flanagan replied that based on the current SLA, the numbers are ugly, but noted that the RPC did not receive many complaints. She asked if the current SLA is reasonable. Tony Hansen noted that the current SLA is based on the number of documents, without consideration for the documents' size. The RSOC discussed ways to help new editors be trained more quickly. It was noted that editors who had previous experience with the IETF community tend to pick things up faster. Heather Flanagan noted that one ongoing struggle for new editors is knowing what level of edit is appropriate for an RFC, as the amount required generally falls between publishing industry norms. The RSOC discussed whether changing the current SLA would be appropriate; Heather Flanagan will continue that discussion with the stream managers later this week. Heather Flanagan will also talk to the RPC about what is involved in new editor training, and ask how the RSOC can help. 3) ISOC, the IETF, the RFC Series, and marketing/branding Heather Flanagan noted that with the upcoming RFC format change, there will be a change to the current recognizable RFC brand. Heather stated that her goal is to be aware of the brand while still making things easier for those consuming the documents. She added that she wants the RFC series to get as much use as it can, which means marketing the brand. However, there is a challenge, as many people do not distinguish between the RFCs and the IETF, and the RSE does not speak for the IETF. Joe Hildebrand said that he would like to see input from a variety of sources before the RSOC makes any decisions about branding. Joel Halpern added that the format change should be figured out before we start worrying about branding. Joe added that the bulk of the branding will likely be in the CSS, which will be completed as the format work gets into the landing stage. Several people added that getting into the branding discussion now may derail the ongoing work on new format development. The RSOC discussed who is responsible for the RFC brand. Alexey Melnikov took an action to send an email to the IAB posing this question; Joe Hildebrand will pick that discussion up with the IAB. 4) Succession planning for the RSE role Heather Flanagan noted that the RSE is a contracted function, but that there is a very long ramp-up period before one can be truly effective in the role; she said that it took her 18-24 months from becoming the RSE before she felt she understood the intricacies of the various groups and how they interact with each other and with the tools, and what requires community input. The biggest part is managing all of the relationships. She asked what can be done to make this all easier for the next person to take on the RSE role. Sarah Banks suggested keeping a living document with what the current RSE feels is the job. Heather Flanagan replied that she does have that, as well as a procedures manual that is archived by the RPC. However, it is less about documentation, and more about the time needed to build relationships. Alexey Melnikov added that much will also depend on the personalities of the chairs and the politics of the time. Ray Pelletier suggested looking at the RFC that defines the RSE role and seeing if anything should be updated based on Heather's experience. Heather Flanagan asked that the RSOC keep the succession question in mind, and to let her know if they have any ideas. 5) Project planning for 2015-2018 Heather Flanagan reported that the RSE's current short-term projects include the RFC format work, DOIs, RPC tools, and the RFC Editor website. She asked what else the RSE should be doing as the format work progresses and requires less of her time. Heather noted that she met with the RPC to brainstorm possibilities, and together they came up with three categories of projects: 1) Author Services * Focused EFL support * More "traditional" publisher services, such as providing citation counts, help with overall marketing (increase global exposure of RFCs by working with national indexing services such as the European Commission ICT database (JoinUp) to include RFCs) 2) Technical Services * Comment system for RFCs * Context-driven search results * Keyword improvements and possibly a global glossary * Document management system (to better track versions and diffs as authors and editors work on documents) * Errata system improvements 3) Services to make the series more readable * Facilitate the discussions on a common format for packet diagrams, flow diagrams, state transition diagrams, code blocks Heather Flanagan will update the projects page on the RSE wiki <http://www.rfc-editor.org/rse/wiki/> accordingly. 6) RSE Evaluation The RSOC discussed the RSE evaluation in an Executive Session.