[rfc-i] citing historic internet drafts

Joe Touch touch at ISI.EDU
Fri Oct 17 06:52:35 PDT 2008


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



Bob Braden wrote:
>   *> As a concrete suggestion I'd change the boilerplate to say:
>   *> 
>   *> ...inappropriate to cite Internet-Drafts other than as "work in
>   *> progress", or for work no longer in progress, "unpublished working draft".
>   *> 
>   *> And I certainly agree that it should not require this much discussion to
>   *> fix the problem. 
>   *> 
>   *> Keith
>   *> 
> 
> Keith,
> 
> That seems to violate the time-invariance of RFCs.

RFCs contain URLs, which are somewhat time-variant, so that ship has
sailed, IMO. ;-)

However, the point here is to cite things for *credit*. I hope we all
agree that citing inaccessible material for key content isn't
appropriate. An inaccesible reference whose content is required for
context or understanding needs to be summarized sufficiently in the
document to make the citation for credit only.

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

iEYEARECAAYFAkj4mKIACgkQE5f5cImnZrveZACbBfNgQx6y9PKRZmJqm5DOlXDl
XFwAn0wphx6BTWyKqo1oe2dsqGqaHs0h
=77Bm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list