[rfc-i] RFC citations committee I-D issued
touch at isi.edu
Thu Feb 10 15:19:43 PST 2011
On 2/10/2011 3:13 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
>> Overall, it's dangerous to cite something that can disappear (except
>> as credit)
>> - esp. if it's intended to disappear.
> I-Ds don't disappear. They might move but they are still accessible.
> They actually never did disappear, but now it's convenient to get at the
> older ones.
Current IDs don't disappear, but there certainly are ones that are gone
forever (before one of the updates to the copyright doc - I don't recall
which one, but there was one).
>> In this case, the date gets you the difference anyway. I'd say "MAY
>> include the
>> filename in general, SHOULD include the filename if there are multiple
>> for a given date)
> Joe, this isn't a abstract math exercise. Making the reader play games
> to find the document is wrong-headed. (Also, Julian just pointed out to
> me that the dates on these docs are not confirmed during submission...)
Expecting the user to need to find the doc is wrong-headed, IMO. The
whole point of citing an ID ought to be modeled exactly after how
private email is cited - for credit, never for specific content beyond
what is contained in the referring doc.
More information about the rfc-interest