Internet DRAFT - draft-carpenter-whats-an-author
draft-carpenter-whats-an-author
Network Working Group B. Carpenter
Internet-Draft Univ. of Auckland
Intended status: Informational June 14, 2015
Expires: December 16, 2015
What is an Author of an IETF Stream Draft?
draft-carpenter-whats-an-author-02
Abstract
This draft suggests guidelines for assigning authorship in IETF
stream Internet-Drafts. It also discusses the related issues of
acknowledgements, editors and contributors.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 16, 2015.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Carpenter Expires December 16, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft What's an Author? June 2015
Table of Contents
1. Introduction and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. General Issues of Authorship Ethics . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Editors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. List of Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Revised or Replacement Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8. Other Exceptions and Discussions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9. Intellectual Property Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
12. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
13. Change log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
14. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction and Scope
The question sometimes comes up of who should be listed as the
author(s) of a draft, who should be listed as editors or
contributors, and what acknowledgements are appropriate. The
guidelines below are aimed at Internet-Drafts in the IETF publication
stream [RFC4844], [RFC5741].
Any inconsistency with [RFC7221] is unintentional, and related issues
are discussed in [I-D.crocker-rfc2418bis-wgguidelines]. The
guidelines are intended to be compatible with the RFC Editor's style
guide [RFC7322], with the RFC Editor's authorship policies
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-
interest/2015-May/008869.html> and with the IESG statement on
Internet Draft Authorship <http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/
internet-draft-authorship.html>.
This draft has been written to aid discussion and is not intended to
be published as an RFC. It in no way, shape or form intends to
change the IETF standards process and the related rules on
intellectual property. It could be used as input to revision of the
Tao of the IETF or of other relevant IETF documents.
2. General Issues of Authorship Ethics
There are some quite general aspects of the ethics of professional
authorship of academic or technical documents that naturally apply to
IETF drafts. This is not the place for a detailed discussion of
authorship ethics, but the most important points are
Carpenter Expires December 16, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft What's an Author? June 2015
o Factual accuracy.
o Avoidance of misleading or obfuscating statements.
o Avoidance of misleading omissions.
o Balance between opposing arguments, when relevant.
o Careful acknowledgement and citation of sources and references.
o Avoidance of unacknowledged plagiarism.
Factual accuracy includes accuracy about who wrote the document: only
people who made a real contribution should be listed as authors or
contributors.
Other aspects are that personal or business considerations should not
affect accuracy and balance, and any hidden conflicts of interest
should be documented. Corrections, clarifications and retractions
should be made promptly when needed.
Many academic journals and universities have published policies about
authorship ethics. Examples from life sciences are
<http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-
responsibilities/>, and <http://www.apa.org/research/responsible/
publication/>.
However, the IETF has some peculiarities. Perhaps the most important
is that we generally encourage the free flow of ideas and their re-
use in fresh documents. Sometimes that means that small or large
sections of text are copied from one document into another, and
subsequently changed as the discussion evolves. In the world at
large that is considered to be plagiarism. In the IETF, we consider
it to be normal business as long as due acknowledgement is given.
This document is specifically scoped for IETF Internet-Drafts and is
not intended to apply to non-IETF Internet-Drafts. Some parts might
apply to other document streams but that is incidental. (See
Section 5 of [RFC4844] for an explanation of the various document
streams.)
3. Authors
Authors are people who have made a substantial creative contribution
to the document. Normally this means writing text or drawing
diagrams. Occasionally, with the consent of the other authors, it
means making some other substantial creative contribution to the
document, for example by writing a software implementation as part of
the design process. It's a matter of judgement whether a person who
Carpenter Expires December 16, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft What's an Author? June 2015
simply makes a key intellectual contribution should rank as an
author.
People who did not make any such substantial contribution should not
be listed as authors. Funding support, professional reputation,
managerial or supervisory status, and CV embellishment don't count.
It's also worth noting that in the IETF, authorship by an employee
does not imply endorsement by the employer. Therefore, authors
should not be added just because of who they work for.
There are quite a few subjective judgements to be made about whether
a contribution is substantial enough to count as authorship. What
fraction of new or corrected text counts? Is a particular brilliant
idea enough? Should the author of a previous trail-blazing document
be invited to join? Should someone who promised to contribute
significantly, but only contributed fragments, be removed? It's hard
to give definite guidelines for such cases.
In normal circumstances, people should never be listed as authors
without their explicit permission. In case of doubt, the person
submitting the draft should check with each listed author in advance
to avoid any misunderstandings. If an author wishes to withdraw,
this should be honoured, although the person may then be listed as a
contributor or be mentioned in the acknowledgements.
The practical impact is that the authors will be listed as such on
the front page if the document becomes an RFC, and in public
bibliographies.
4. Contributors
Contributors are people who made smaller creative contributions to
the document than the authors, for example providing initial ideas
that others have transformed into publishable text, or drafting only
a few paragraphs.
People who did not make any such contribution should not be listed as
contributors. People should not normally be listed as contributors
without their explicit permission.
The dividing line between contributors and authors is a matter of
judgement and cannot be rigidly defined. However, the RFC Editor's
policy is to query any document that has more than five listed
authors. Any list of more than five authors will need to be
negotiated if the document is approved for publication as an RFC.
Carpenter Expires December 16, 2015 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft What's an Author? June 2015
5. Editors
When a document has a large number of contributors and potential
authors, it may be appropriate to designate one or two people as both
"Authors" and "Editors" and list the others as contributors. The
editors will indeed do the actual work of editing the document on
behalf of the community. The practical impact of this is that the
editors will be listed as such on the front page if the document
becomes an RFC, and in public bibliographies.
In some cases, it may be appropriate to retain a list of authors of
which one or two are designated as editors. What matters is "truth
in advertising": the people involved should all feel happy that the
designations of editors, authors and contributors are fair and
accurate.
It's worth noting that in some people's opinion, once a draft has
been adopted by a WG, all future changes are performed as an editing
action on behalf of the WG. Traditionally, the IETF has chosen to
retain the word "Author" in most cases, with the formal designation
of editors being exceptional. Some other standards development
organizations always remove individual authorship when a document is
formally adopted.
6. List of Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements should be given to people who have made significant
creative contributions smaller than those from the authors and
contributors, or to people who have made useful comments, provided
critical reviews, or otherwise contributed significantly to the
development of the document. If text or ideas have been adopted from
other written sources, including IETF documents, clearly a reference
is an ethical requirement, but an acknowledgement might also be
appropriate.
Acknowledgements may also be given to people or organizations that
have given material support and assistance, but this should not
include the authors' regular employers unless there are exceptional
circumstances.
An acknowledgement should be written as a description of a fact. It
does not and should not signify that the person acknowledged agrees
with or supports the document. In general, people who do not wish to
be listed as an author or a contributor, but have in fact made a
significant contribution, should be given an acknowledgement. In
unusual circumstances, acknowledgements of contributions have
specifically indicated that the contributor does not support the
document as posted. Language such as the following might be used:
Carpenter Expires December 16, 2015 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft What's an Author? June 2015
Thanks to <insert names> for their valuable comments and help
during the development of this document, even though they did not
fully agree with the WG's conclusion.
When in doubt, it is usually better to include an acknowledgement
than to omit it.
7. Revised or Replacement Documents
A common occurrence is that an IETF document from some years ago
requires updating. This is often done by people who were not the
original authors. The question then arises of whether to list the
original authors on the "bis" draft, even if they are long gone from
IETF participation.
When an Internet-Draft is prepared by one or more new people but
reuses significant amounts of text from one or more earlier RFCs and/
or I-Ds, a situation arises that often requires thought and careful
handling. The criteria above suggest that the authors of the
original documents should continue to be listed as authors. After
all, there is rarely any question that the earlier publications
constitute "a substantial creative contribution" to the revised
document. However, there are no guarantees that the prior authors
will want to be listed as authors of the new draft and take on
whatever responsibilities that implies. Ideally, those assembling
the newer version will consult with the authors of the previous ones
and make mutually acceptable arrangements, but, especially when that
is not feasible, sensitivity to all possible issues will be needed.
8. Other Exceptions and Discussions
It goes without saying that normally nobody should be listed as an
author, contributor or editor against their will. Ideally, the
parties involved will agree among themselves, or defer to the
judgement of the WG Chairs or Area Directors. Practice may vary
between WGs. However, we need flexibility to deal with unusual
cases, such as these:
o As noted above, an acknowledgement is a statement of fact (the
person contributed to the discussion). In some cases it may be
included even if the person acknowledged objects, for example if
they made a suggestion that might later be viewed as prior art.
o Generalising the point made in Section 7, an earlier author or
contributor may deserve to be listed, even if they cannot be
contacted when a document is updated after a long interval. Each
such case needs to be considered on its merits.
Carpenter Expires December 16, 2015 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft What's an Author? June 2015
o In particular, an author or contributor might be deceased.
9. Intellectual Property Rights
This document does not discuss intellectual property rights and in no
way preempts or alters the IETF's rules and requirements concerning
intellectual property rights. In particular some of the ethical
guidelines above might be mandatory requirements under those rules.
All IETF participants are strongly advised to be familiar with the
rules.
It is worth noting that if a draft includes complete acknowledgements
and references, it will be much simpler to clarify its status as
possible prior art in years to come.
Copyright in IETF documents is governed by BCP 78 [RFC5378] and its
predecessors, the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions, and applicable
national and international law.
The word "contributor" used in this draft might not mean the same
thing as the word "Contributor" used in BCP 79 [RFC3979]. That BCP
should be consulted by anyone concerned about the IETF requirement
for disclosure of intellectual property rights.
10. Security Considerations
None, really.
11. IANA Considerations
This memo includes no request to IANA.
12. Acknowledgements
Valuable comments were received from Loa Andersson, Andy Bierman,
Carsten Bormann, Dave Crocker, David Farmer, John Klensin (who also
contributed some text), Larry Kreeger, Eliot Lear, Tom Petch,
Alexandru Petrescu, Yaron Sheffer, and Joe Touch.
Especially given the topic of this draft, the author apologises for
any accidental omissions.
13. Change log
draft-carpenter-whats-an-author-02, 2015-06-14: more comments, nits,
some reorganisation.
Carpenter Expires December 16, 2015 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft What's an Author? June 2015
draft-carpenter-whats-an-author-01, 2015-05-30: incorporating
community comments, citing RFC Editor and IESG statements.
draft-carpenter-whats-an-author-00, 2015-04-24: original version.
14. Informative References
[I-D.crocker-rfc2418bis-wgguidelines]
dcrocker, d. and R. Droms, "IETF Working Group Guidelines
and Procedures", draft-crocker-rfc2418bis-wgguidelines-00
(work in progress), March 2015.
[RFC3979] Bradner, S., "Intellectual Property Rights in IETF
Technology", BCP 79, RFC 3979, March 2005.
[RFC4844] Daigle, L. and Internet Architecture Board, "The RFC
Series and RFC Editor", RFC 4844, July 2007.
[RFC5378] Bradner, S. and J. Contreras, "Rights Contributors Provide
to the IETF Trust", BCP 78, RFC 5378, November 2008.
[RFC5741] Daigle, L., Kolkman, O., and IAB, "RFC Streams, Headers,
and Boilerplates", RFC 5741, December 2009.
[RFC7221] Farrel, A. and D. Crocker, "Handling of Internet-Drafts by
IETF Working Groups", RFC 7221, April 2014.
[RFC7322] Flanagan, H. and S. Ginoza, "RFC Style Guide", RFC 7322,
September 2014.
Author's Address
Brian Carpenter
Department of Computer Science
University of Auckland
PB 92019
Auckland 1142
New Zealand
Email: brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com
Carpenter Expires December 16, 2015 [Page 8]
