[rfc-i] RFC Format - final requirements and next steps

Andrew Sullivan ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
Thu May 17 09:49:59 PDT 2012


On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 09:31:55AM -0700, Tim Bray wrote:
> I do not agree that per-paragraph accessibility is a requirement.  -T

I agree, and if one thinks about the comparison with page-number-based
citations, one concludes something similar.  In cases where you want
to refer casually to something by page number, you say "pp nn-mm" or
"p n".  If you want to draw out something in particular, you say
"[quoted passage here] (p n)", or something similar.  In every one of
these cases, a section number or section numbers would do.  (In
academic work, it's not like you can go to the page number, find the
reference, and be done.  You have to read the surrounding text
anyway, or you won't understand it.)

Ok, what about an RFC that has no section numbers?  Well, you can
still refer to the RFC.  If it's short enough that it didn't need
sections, then all is good.  If it's so long that you need something
shorter, but it didn't include section numbers, I wonder what RFC is
the example.  And if one needs to refer to the point the RFC is
making, then surely the right thing to do is to refer to the whole
thing.

Best,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list