[rfc-i] Headers and Boilerplates is done.

Dave CROCKER 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 
document.

Hence, for example:

    Source:  IETF  IRTF  IAB  **[Independent]**

or

    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 
full name.

But the key point, here, is to help the reader to know that the alternative 
sources actually exist.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list