Document management & review (was Re: [dns-wg] RIPE's MNAME recommendation)

[Jim Reid <]

On Oct 4, 2005, at 09:32, Doug Barton wrote:

> As long as we're talking about updating 203, I'd also like to take  
> this
> opportunity to point out that the current discussion highlights  
> some of the
> problems with documents of this type, namely that they are  
> generally out of
> date within minutes of being published.
Although this is a diversion from the original discussion, I think  
it's a worthwhile topic for the WG to consider. Maybe the WG could  
put expiry dates on its documents? ie "This document dies in X years  
unless it is reviewed and updated if necessary." I'm sure Peter would  
have made a mental note that 203 would need to be revisited some time  
after it came out. [Which will explain why it's on the agenda for  
next week. :-)] Perhaps that could/should be formalised somehow so  
that some of the WG agenda planning can be done on a longer-term basis?