[rfc-i] "canonical" URI for RFCs, BCPs

Paul Hoffman paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Mon Feb 1 08:55:15 PST 2010


At 8:07 AM -0800 2/1/10, Joe Touch wrote:
>Librarians try to ensure that such indirections are temporary, until the
>card catalog is updated. I've never been to a library where such
>indirection was a persistent part of the indexing.

The primary users of canonical URIs for RFCs and BCPs are not libraries: they are developers and users of the standards. Assuming your statement is correct (and I note that neither you nor I have degrees in library science, nor are librarians), what libraries want are archival URIs. The RFC Editor has been mostly faithful about those, modulo the change from ftp.isi.edu/in-notes to www.rfc-editor.org and the occasional changing of line endings due to FTP traversal.

Again: canonical does not necessarily mean archival, although it could if, for example, there is no other valuable information to give other than the document itself. For the RFC and BCP series, there is clearly other valuable information, and nearly all of us believe that there is an authoritative source for that information.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list