[rfc-i] draft-iab-streams-headers-boilerplates-07.txt

Alfred =?hp-roman8?B?SM5uZXM=?= ah at tr-sys.de
Thu Mar 19 06:51:54 PDT 2009


In response to Russ Housley's reminder and Leslie Daigle's reply
archived at
  http://mailman.RFC-Editor.ORG/pipermail/rfc-interest/2009-March/001261.html
  http://mailman.RFC-Editor.ORG/pipermail/rfc-interest/2009-March/001262.html


All,
the current  draft-iab-streams-headers-boilerplates-07  says:

-----snip----
3.2.3.  Paragraph 3

   The boilerplate ends with a reference to where further relevant
   information can be found.  As boilerplate, this text should not be
|  document-specific, although the material to which it refers may lead
   to document-specific information.  The exact wording is subject to
   change (at the RFC Editor's discretion), but current text is:

   "Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
   http://www.rfc-editor.org/status/<stream-id>.html"

   where <stream-id> is one of: "ietf", "iab", "irtf", "independent".
-----snip----

I always read that text as an indication that the boilerplate text
should lead to a web page that contains the RFC specific information
(maybe via an intermediate index, a search function, or similar),
and thus would match the IESG expectations Russ has recalled.

May I suggest a tiny change to the tagged line above, to better
clarify this interpretation?


                       [...]  As boilerplate, this text should not be
|  document-specific, although the material to which it refers may lead
   to document-specific information.  [...]
---                                                            ^^^
                       [...]  As boilerplate, this text should not be
|  document-specific, although the material to which it refers will lead
   to document-specific information.  [...]
                                                               ^^^^

Hopefully, with this change the management/tools concerns of that
variability in boilerplate text should be limited (which already has
faded out to a substantial degree!) is taken care of, as well as the
IESG's / RFC reader's interest in a "one-stop" source for information
on a particular RFC that got available *after* publication of the RFC.


Many folks perhaps would appreciate to find links to the evolution
of the document into that RFCs very useful as well, as it it currently
presented at <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfcXXXX>, but since that is
out of control / archival responsibility of the RFC Editor, it would
be unreasonable to *request* that information from the RFC Editor
web site.


Thus, I envision a possible entry found in, or pointed to, by the
Stream specific index page, for instance at
    <http://www.rfc-editor.org/status/<stream-id>.html#rfc=XXXX>
or
    <http://www.rfc-editor.org/status/<stream-id>_details.php?rfc=XXXX>

in the form:

  RFC XXXX     <title>
    Authors:   <authors>
    Published: <publication month/day> as a <Proposed Standard|...>
  Current Status:        <Proposed Standard|STDzzz|BCPmmm|...|Obsolete>
                    [or: Draft Standard per IESG Protocol Action {link} ]
                    [or: Historic per IESG Protocol Action {link} ]
                    [or: Historic -- per RFC YYYY {link}

  [ Errata have been filed. See {link}. ]

  [ Updated by:
              RFC xxx1   {link}
              RFC xxx2   {link}
               .   .
               .   .   ]

  [ Obsoleted by:
              RFC xxx1   {link}
              RFC xxx2   {link}
               .   .
               .   .   ]

  This RFC is ...
               a product of the zzz WG of the IETF. {link}
       or:     a product of the zzz RG of the IRTF. {link}
       or:     an Indvidual Submission sponsored by
               the <rrr> Area {link} of the IETF.
       or:     an IAB Statement.
       or:     an IAB Workshop Report. {link to workshop pages?}
       or:     an IESG Statement.
       or:     an Independent Submission to the RFC Editor.
       or:     an April 01 RFC.

  The development and approval of this document can be traced from {link}.
          [may use Tools web page there]

  [ Comments should be directed to
    {the document authors|the document editors|<individual>|
     the zzz <WG|RG> discussion list}. {current link} ]
>>> drop this clause if author email unknown and no active list!

  [ Patent claims filed as related to the content of this document:
              {link1}
              {link2}
                 .
                 .    ]


(More thoughts are welcome!)

Please note that much (but not all) of the information represented
above can already be algotithmically extracted fron the XML version
of the RFC index or by other well-defined rules/procedures.


Kind regards,
  Alfred.

-- 

+------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
| TR-Sys Alfred Hoenes   |  Alfred Hoenes   Dipl.-Math., Dipl.-Phys.  |
| Gerlinger Strasse 12   |  Phone: (+49)7156/9635-0, Fax: -18         |
| D-71254  Ditzingen     |  E-Mail:  ah at TR-Sys.de                     |
+------------------------+--------------------------------------------+



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list