[rfc-i] draft-iab-styleguide-02 on referencing STDs

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Sun Apr 13 09:53:58 PDT 2014


On 2014-04-13 18:38, Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 4/12/2014 1:17 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
>> (2) What I have proposed several times now is that the style
>> guide and xml2rfc allow nested references, allowing
>>
>>   [STDxx]   ...
>>        [RFCnnnn] bloggs, J., ....
>>        [RFCmmmm] Smith, X., ....
>
>
> When a special notation is required for a citation, we've got a deeper
> problem.
>
> While we might develop the conventions for use within IETF documents, no
> one in the rest of the world will know about them.
>
> My simplistic question is:  What is the added value, here, provided by
> citing STD number rather than RFC number?

I agree that it would be good to understand the problem that needs to be 
solved first.

In the ~10 years that I've been working on IETF documents I have rarely 
seen a case where citing a STD or BCP actually had an advantage. Alter 
all, it only works in cases where you don't need/want to cite a specific 
part of a document.

Also, as one of then authors of a six-part spec that might eventually 
become a STD, I'd really like to understand how it's going to be 
referenced in the mid term.

Best regards, Julian


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list