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