[rfc-i] URIs in RFC references, was: feedback on draft-iab-styleguide-01

Dave Crocker dhc at dcrocker.net
Wed Mar 26 13:58:10 PDT 2014


On 3/26/2014 12:58 PM, John R Levine wrote:
>>> If we're doing kludges, it would also be reasonable to put the whole
>>> RFC into the page up to some size limit like 100K, and truncate it
>>> with a link for the rest beyond that.  I see that there are 873 RFCs
>>> larger than 100K, and about 6000 smaller.
>>
>> Right, and this will be exactly the wrong behavior in many cases, of
>> no benefit in most cases, and will happen infrequently enough that it
>> will be seen as an error and reported to the tools team every time it
>> happens!   :)
>
> Since it's exactly what the datatracker does now, it can't be that wrong.


The datatracker currently servces as a secondary path to documents. 
Most search engine results point to tools.  Most citations are either 
tools or rfc-editor.org.

Consequently, we don't really have much operational data on the way 
'average' users will react to the 'partial output' model.

As with Ted, I find the current behavior annoying.

d/


-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list