[rfc-i] "canonical" URI for RFCs, BCPs
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Tue Jan 26 13:39:04 PST 2010
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
It would be great if this URL pattern would not assume that RFCs will
always use TXT format.
So I'd prefer
More information about the rfc-interest