[rfc-i] [IAB] Section Ordering in RFCs (Abstract Placement)

John C Klensin john+rfc at jck.com
Wed Jul 1 12:30:20 PDT 2009



--On Tuesday, June 30, 2009 16:11 +0200 Julian Reschke
<julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:

> RFC Editor wrote:
>> Greetings All,
>> 
>> The recent changes to the copyright for RFCs (RFC 5378), and
>> the changes that will be required when
>> draft-iab-streams-headers-boilerplates-08.txt is published,
>> often result in the abstract not appearing on the front page
>> of the RFC. We concur with the IETF-list comments that
>...
>> The RFC Editor will implement this change as of 1 July 2009.
>...
> How does this affect section ordering in Internet Drafts? That
> should be consistent, if only for making generating diffs,
> right?

Julian, I haven't seen a response to your question, so will try
with the understanding that I'm not speaking for anyone else.

Ideally, yes.  But we've got a division of responsibility and
authority here.  The RFC Editor cannot change the requirements
and format for I-Ds, only the IESG can.  Interestingly, I've
tested the "nits" and submission tools with the new format, and
they don't care -- as far as they are concerned, "abstract
first" is valid.  The only problem is that those tools seem to
think that the text of the abstract starts after the "Abstract"
heading and extends to the beginning of the Table of Contents if
there is one.  That is likely to make some abstract-extracting
tools work a little strangely.

So, getting the I-D format changed, in practice, requires that:

(1) The IESG decide either that it is a good idea or that they
don't care.

(2) The submission and related tools be updated to use a
different heuristic for determining the end of the abstract.

    john



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list