[rfc-i] citing historic internet drafts

Joe Touch touch at ISI.EDU
Wed Oct 15 10:29:21 PDT 2008


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Julian Reschke wrote:
> Joe Touch wrote:
>> ....
> 
> Maybe I'm a bit slow with process issues like this, but to me, as a
> reader, "work in progress" means just that: this is not finished, but
> somebody is working on it.
> 
> So, again, what's the best way to cite something that once was published
> as ID, but was abandoned?
> 
> It seems to me that there is none, except by lying to the reader.

You can always say "expired Internet Draft", either in addition, or instead.

However, I don't think it's useful to try to argue about the use of
document terms in the IETF. RFCs aren't requests for anything, so the
fact that Works in Progress expire isn't particularly problematic either.

Joe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkj2KHEACgkQE5f5cImnZruUHACdGAz4CYPVlHbvH4nuEa2Qq86+
tNYAn2R3+We7ryKQNyfpsNG2riG0USeL
=eBBD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list