[rfc-i] URL Issue, was Re: draft-iab-streams-headers-boilerplates-07.txt

SM sm at resistor.net
Fri Apr 3 09:22:31 PDT 2009

At 08:05 03-04-2009, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>Please, no. Those URLs are permanent, in that they are listed in a 
>permanent RFC. Adding in the "<stream-id>" means that, a decade from 
>now, we will have to explain why we use these old stream names even 
>though there are now different ones.

I agree with Paul.  It may make sense now to have <stream-id> in the 
URL.  We don't know whether the stream classification will still be 
appropriate if there are any changes in future.

>A different proposal is simply 
>"http://www.rfc-editor.org/status/rfc<rfc-no>". Implementation with 
>this URL could initially a redirect to a very generic 
>stream-specific page and, as more tools are available/programmed, it 
>could become more specific.

The above proposal works for all the RFCs which have been published 
up to this day.  It might be easier to have one generic URL ( 
http://www.rfc-editor.org/status/rfc ).  The user can type in the the 
RFC number of stream-id, for example, to get more information as that 
is the reason why these URLs are being proposed for the boilerplate.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list