[rfc-i] Proposal for v3 to simplify most references
paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Sun Feb 9 08:14:07 PST 2014
On Feb 8, 2014, at 9:20 PM, John Levine <johnl at taugh.com> wrote:
>> Are there any objections to this addition to the v3 vocabulary?
> If we plan for the XML to be the definitive version of documents, I
> would not be thrilled about this:
> <reference anchor="IPRNEW" bcp="79"/> # Will expand to RFC 3979 and RFC 4879
> If that's in some RFC published today, and in a couple of years, we
> publish RFC 10979 that updates the IPR rules and becomes the new BCP79,
> what will people get when they render the XML?
> This isn't an insoluble problem, but if the XML is definititive, even
> the current situation implicitly depends on the entries in the
> citation libraries never changing.
Hrm, good call. It works for BCPs that have changed, but not ones that will change.
So, in the proposal I sent, make the "expanded" attribute mandatory for "bcp" and "std".
More information about the rfc-interest