Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Tue Jan 26 13:41:48 PST 2010
But does anyone systematically allocate DOIs to RFCs?
Should the RFC Editor be asked to do this?
On 2010-01-27 10:22, Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
> I obviously can't prove or disprove your assertion (and neither of us is likely to be around to collect on a bet), but I suspect that librarians know a thing or two about long-term archival, certainly more than I do. Given that IEEE and ACM use the system, among many others scientific publishers, I'd guess they'd find somebody to take over doi.org should the current consortium bite the dust. ("Approximately 40 million DOI names have been assigned by DOI System Registration Agencies in the US, Australasia, and Europe.")
> On Jan 26, 2010, at 4:18 PM, Joe Touch wrote:
>> DOIs appear to be just "yet another level of indirection", in much the
>> same way as TinyURLs. I.e., when the DOI website fails, you can't find
>> the info even if the destination site is available. The DOI system
>> doesn't maintain the actual docs, just a pointer. We have rfc-editor.org
>> for that.
>> Why do we need this level of indirection and additional point of failure?
>> AFAICT, the following pattern ought to be the one with the long-term
>> My money is on rfc-editor.org being around long after doi.org has bitten
>> the dust.
>> Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
>>> DOIs would be nice, given that every other technical paper of relevance now has one.
>>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 3:29 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>>> is there a canonical URI for references to RFCs and BCPs?
>>>> I'm well aware of all the various URIs that *work*, but is there one for which there is a long-term commitment of stability?
>>>> Best regards, Julian
>>>> rfc-interest mailing list
>>>> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
>>> rfc-interest mailing list
>>> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
More information about the rfc-interest