[rfc-i] Headers and Boilerplates is done.
dhc2 at dcrocker.net
Wed Nov 18 17:31:30 PST 2009
Paul Hoffman wrote:
> +1. That will be a lot clearer to the typical RFC reader five or ten years
> from now than the current wording.
The typical reader today -- nevermind 5 or 10 years from now -- does not know
any of these names or acronyms, except perhaps the IETF.
If the goal is archival precision, the proposed details will suffice.
If the goal is to assist a reader outside of our immediate community -- a
technician sitting in the Czech Republic, India, or Colombia -- then they need
to be given the list of choices, to appreciate which one applies to the current
Hence, for example:
Source: IETF IRTF IAB **[Independent]**
Source: **[IETF]** IRTF IAB Independent
In fact, it would probably also be useful to list the entire set of text choices
proposed on this thread, somewhere in the boilerplate, to map the acronym to the
But the key point, here, is to help the reader to know that the alternative
sources actually exist.
More information about the rfc-interest