[rfc-i] Does the canonical RFC format need to be "readable" by developers and others?

Iljitsch van Beijnum iljitsch at muada.com
Fri Jun 22 14:43:25 PDT 2012


On 22 Jun 2012, at 23:31 , Julian Reschke wrote:

> I believe the risk that XSLT or Python interpreters disappear is low. Dunno about TCL.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Python_(programming_language)#Development:

CPython's public releases come in three types, distinguished by which part of the version number is incremented:

	• backwards-incompatible versions, where code is expected to break and must be manually ported. The first part of the version number is incremented. These releases happen infrequently—for example, version 3.0 was released 8 years after 2.0.

> Actually, the format *is* simple enough. New code that interprets it has been implemented twice now (at least).

How much work is this? And what kind of dependencies are we talking about?

Remember, 40 years is a long time. But I'm pretty sure people will still be reading the IPv6 RFCs 40 years after their publication.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list