[rfc-i] Allowing RFC numbers in abstracts

Joyce Reynolds jkrey at ISI.EDU
Tue Oct 25 09:43:21 PDT 2005


This is not a new proposed way to do things.  It has been policy for quite a 
long time:


Abstract Section

Every RFC must have an Abstract section following the Copyright notice. An 
Abstract will typically be 5-10 lines. An Abstract of more than 20 lines is 
generally not acceptable.

The Abstract section should provide a concise and comprehensive
overview of the purpose and contents of the entire document, to give a
technically knowledgeable reader a general overview of the function of
the document. In addition to its function in the RFC itself, the
Abstract section text will appear in publication announcements and in
the online index of RFCs.

Composing a useful Abstract generally requires thought and care.
Usually an Abstract should begin with a phrase like "This memo ..." or
"This document ...". A satisfactory abstract can often be constructed
in part from material within the Introduction section, but a good
abstract will be shorter, less detailed, and perhaps broader in scope
than the Introduction. Simply copying and pasting the first few
paragraphs of the Introduction is tempting, but it may result in an
Abstract that is both incomplete and redundant. Note also that an
Abstract is not a substitute for an Introduction; the RFC should be
self-contained as if there were no Abstract section.

An Abstract should be complete in itself; it should not contain
citations unless they are completely defined within the Abstract.
Abbreviations appearing in the Abstract should generally be expanded in
parentheses. There is a small set of reasonable exceptions to this rule
(see guidelines on abbreviations, above.)

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list