[rfc-i] accessibility for the series, RE: Some questions on the model and the motivations
Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Fri Jan 7 13:42:37 PST 2011
Library searches that I have access to, the University of Auckland
and the (UK) IET, are good at finding on-line copyright material
such as IEEE publications. Google can often find them too, but
often not the full text, which requires some kind of subscription
It's annoying that these two worlds of search are separate, and I think
Glenn's point is to make sure that RFCs are in both of them.
Not a fundamental point for our debate, however.
On 2011-01-08 10:22, Bob Hinden wrote:
> On Jan 7, 2011, at 1:05 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> On 2011-01-06 07:22, Bob Hinden wrote:
>>> "Library Catalogs"? I think this is looking backward toward printed media,
>> Not. At least at the university which I now frequent, the library search
>> tool (which has replaced the traditional catalogue) is mainly used to find
>> on line resources these days.
>> When I ask it to find RFC2119 (probably the most widely cited RFC of all),
>> either by number or by title, it returns zero records.
>> Author contains 'Bradner' and title contains 'RFCs' returns one record,
>> Scott's obituary note for Jon in Network World, Oct 26, 1998, p.38(1).
>> So Glenn has a point, I believe.
> That is certainly interesting. I wonder that if the library search tool doesn't find RFCs, then it probably doesn't find most of the content on the Internet that is not related to print media. If that is true, then this looks like a bigger problem for the library search tool than for the RFC series.
> Also, the point of this thread wasn't that there was not any value in having RFCs show up in library catalogs, just that it's not a very high priority activity and in my view was not a justification for a particular model of the RSE.
> p.s. Google search for "Bradner RFC" gets over 300K hits.
More information about the rfc-interest