[rfc-i] Call for Review of draft-iab-styleguide-01.txt, "RFC Style Guide"
sm at resistor.net
Tue Mar 4 11:06:50 PST 2014
At 09:16 04-03-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>The most important comment for me as start message is that the 1st
>April RFC should be categorised different than IETF standards. IMHO,
>The past RFC style is not a reasonable style of the world or the
>future best practices. In considering our standards business and our
>documents reputation, we should not make jokes with our followers
>only if we are sure all like such jokes.
>I don't want to stop that Style type, but it should be easily
>discriminated by readers/users from other real work/business.
The special RFCs are not part of the IETF Stream and they are not an
IETF standard in any way. I agree that some of these RFCs might be
difficult for some readers to understand. I don't think that a
decision about categorizing RFCs should be part of the discussion
about RFC Style.
More information about the rfc-interest