[rfc-i] RFC citations committee I-D issued
rja.lists at gmail.com
Fri Feb 11 08:34:11 PST 2011
On 11 Feb 2011, at 11:15 , Julian Reschke wrote:
> So which date are you referring to?
> Date of submission?
> Date of publication?
> Or the date inside the I-D?
> All of these can be different; in particular the latter can be totally off.
Date on the I-D.
In the citation world at large, there is consistent practice to cite the date
included in the document itself -- for example a university technical report --
EVEN IF that is not the most precise date. I see no obvious reason we
should be gratuitously different from other citation practices.
In my experience, the automated submission tools do reject I-Ds that have
grossly erroneous dates, but will accept I-Ds that contain a date within
a few days of the date the posting transaction occurs.
(For example, please consider that since the day varies at different parts
of the globe, a submission from Guam dated X might be entirely accurate,
yet also might appear to be premature to a server located in Europe
or North America.)
More information about the rfc-interest