[rfc-i] RFC citations committee I-D issued

Joe Touch touch at isi.edu
Fri Feb 11 12:00:55 PST 2011

Hi, Scott,

On 2/11/2011 11:48 AM, Scott O. Bradner wrote:
> to both Brian&  Joe
> seems to me that the current citations committee proposal is missing context
> and will be seen as a blanket permisison to cite individual IDs by
> name&  version

I think so; IMO the caveat ought to include "for attribution only".

> that seems to be broken to me
> Joe says: References should be persistent and specific
> agree - the only cases which I see it should be legit to
> cite an ID by name&  version are ones where the particular
> version of teh ID is the "specific" one that you need to cite becase
> it is somehow different from other versions (earlier or later) of
> the same ID

I don't see how it's useful to cite "draft-X" without citing a version 
or date at least, since it can't be an attribution of an idea if it can 
change (nearly entirely) in content.

I.e. either date or version appears to be required, IMO.

So I think we basically agree, but my conclusion appears to be different :-)


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list