2020-06-22-rsoc-minutes
slides-interim-2022-rfcedprog-10-sessa-2020-06-22-rsoc-minutes-00

RFC SERIES OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE (RSOC)
June 22, 2020 RSOC Meeting

Reported by: Cindy Morgan, IETF Secretariat

ATTENDEES
---------------------------------
  Sarah Banks (RSOC Chair) 
  Jay Daley (IETF LLC Board Liaison, non-voting)
  Tony Hansen 
  Cullen Jennings (IAB Lead)
  John Levine, (Temporary RFC Series Project Manager, non-voting)
  Cindy Morgan (Scribe, non-voting)
  Adam Roach
  Peter Saint-Andre

GUEST
---------------------------------
  Sandy Ginoza (RFC Production Center)

REGRETS
---------------------------------
  Mark Nottingham 

RSOC DECISIONS: 2020
---------------------------------
  - 2020-05-27: RSOC agrees that the RFC Series should plan to be able 
    to regenerate the output formats of RFCs. Related action item: John 
    Levine to draft a plan that defines when it is appropriate to 
    regenerate the output formats of RFCs.

  - 2019 Decisions: <https://www.iab.org/wp-content/IAB-uploads/2020/01/rsoc-decisions-2019.txt>

ACTION ITEM REVIEW
---------------------------------

  Done: 

  - 2020-02-26: John Levine to draft a report for RSOC outlining all of 
    the open issues with the v3 work.

  - 2020-02-26: John Levine to draft a plan on how to manage change 
    control for the v3 XML.

  - 2020-04-27: Jay Daley and John Levine to set up a video call with 
    Henrik Levkowetz and Robert Sparks to discuss prioritization of open 
    issues with the v3 tools.

  - 2020-05-27: John Levine to draft a plan that defines when it is 
    appropriate to regenerate the output formats of RFCs and what 
    version control mechanisms should be used.

  In Progress:

  - 2020-05-27: Sarah Banks to ask the RPC if there are any gating 
    issues preventing v3 from being declared stable.

  - 2020-05-27: Sarah Banks to talk to the RPC about running an 
    unofficial "shadow SLA" in order to assess what the actual SLA 
    should be under v3.

  New:

  - 2020-06-22: John Levine to add the plan on how to manage change 
    control for the v3 XML to draft-iab-rfc7991bis and as a README file 
    for the GitHub repository for 
    https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis.

  - 2020-06-22: RSOC to review the plan that defines when it is 
    appropriate to regenerate the output formats of RFCs and what 
    version control mechanisms should be used, and provide feedback on 
    the RSOC list.
    * Deadline: 2020-07-06.

  - 2020-06-22: Jay Daley to draft a process for managing changes to 
    the v3 RFC XML vocabulary.

  - 2020-06-22: John Levine to document the factors that appear to 
    contribute to the very low adoption by authors of v3 XML as a 
    submission format.
    * Deadline: July RSOC meeting, 2020-07-20.

---------------------------------

1. Administrivia

  The minutes of the 2020-05-27 RSOC meeting were approved.

2. v3 Issues and Tools

  John Levine reported that Jay Daley drafted a plan on how to manage 
  change control for the v3 XML RELAX-NG schema.

  Cindy Morgan asked where this plan will be documented so that people 
  can refer back to it. After a brief discussion, the RSOC agreed that 
  the plan should be documented in draft-iab-rfc7991bis and included as 
  a README file for the GitHub repository for 
  https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis.

  * Action item: John Levine to add the plan on how to manage change 
    control for the v3 XML to draft-iab-rfc7991bis and as a README file 
    for the GitHub repository for 
    https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis.

  Sandy Ginoza asked if the RPC will need to archive older versions of 
  the tools in case they do not work with later versions. Jay Daley 
  responded that the tools are archived in the XML2RFC repository, but 
  they will need to know what version of the tool is used to generate 
  something. John Levine replied that the HTML output of RFCs includes 
  what version of the tools was used.

  John Levine reported that he has drafted a plan that defines when it 
  is appropriate to regenerate the output formats of RFCs and what 
  version control mechanisms should be used, and is looking for feedback 
  from the RSOC.

  * Action item: RSOC to review the plan that defines when it is 
    appropriate to regenerate the output formats of RFCs and what 
    version control mechanisms should be used, and provide feedback on 
    the RSOC list by 2020-07-06.

  The RSOC discussed whether there are any gating issues preventing v3 
  from being declared stable.

  Sandy Ginoza said that it is difficult to say, because what the RPC 
  needs from XML2RFCv3 depends on what they get from the authors. The 
  RPC is relying on the Temporary RFC Series Project Manager to let them 
  know when he thinks v3 is stable, and when new issues should be 
  handled as feature requests.

  John Levine noted that there was a recent document that had tables and 
  fixed-width fonts that did not display nicely, but that the problem 
  was resolved by changing how the document was rendered, rather than 
  changing the XML vocabulary. He said that at this point, he thinks v3 
  can be declared stable.

  Cullen Jennings asked how comprehensive the test plan for XML2RFCv3 
  is. John Levine replied that there are a lot of test cases; Sandy 
  Ginoza added that the RPC has not yet seen many cases with SVG or 
  UTF-8 in the body of a document.

  Jay Daley said that if v3 is to be considered stable, then there needs 
  to be a process for change control. Sandy Ginoza added that the 
  process needs to be documented in a public place that the RPC can 
  point authors to.

  * Action item: Jay Daley to draft a process for managing changes to 
    the v3 RFC XML vocabulary.

3. SLA Update

  The RSOC had previously discussed asking the RPC about running an 
  unofficial "shadow SLA" in order to assess what the actual SLA should 
  be under v3.

  Sandy Ginoza replied that the RPC is still posting stats on their 
  website (https://www.rfc-editor.org/report-summary/) that show where 
  things are compared to the previous SLA, and that she hopes that can 
  be used as a reasonable starting point for a new SLA. She also noted 
  that currently Cluster 238 is affecting RPC processing times. The bulk 
  of those documents are expected to be in AUTH48 within the next two or 
  three weeks, after which time the RPC will be able to have a better 
  handle of what processing times will be under v3.

  Sandy Ginoza also noted that of the documents that have been published 
  in v3 XML, only 4% were actually submitted in v3. 88% were submitted 
  in v2 XML, and the remaining 8% were submitted as text files with no 
  XML. The v2 and plain text submissions had to be converted to v3.

  Peter Saint-Andre said that sounds like a problem, and asked how RSOC 
  can encourage documents to be in v3 format before they are submitted 
  to the RPC. Sarah Banks replied that there are a number of authors who 
  don't edit in XML and would prefer to use a Microsoft Word template to 
  get plain text. Cullen Jennings added that the XML2RFC website is 
  still using v2.

  * Action item: John Levine to document the factors that appear to 
    contribute to the very low adoption by authors of v3 XML as a 
    submission format. 

  Sarah Banks will check back in with the RPC about running a shadow SLA 
  once the bulk of Cluster 238 is in AUTH48.

4. Meeting Schedule

  After a brief discussion, the RSOC agreed to try having a standing 
  meeting on the third Monday of the month at 2200 UTC for the next 
  three months, rather than sending out a Doodle poll each month. After 
  three months, the RSOC will reassess whether this has worked for them.

5. Funding Request

  The RSOC supports the funding request from the RPC. Jay Daley will 
  proceed with the request.