[rfc-i] autogeneratedISSN in v3
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Thu May 8 08:40:12 PDT 2014
On 2014-05-08 17:30, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On May 8, 2014, at 8:16 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
>> On 2014-05-08 16:59, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>>> On May 7, 2014, at 11:38 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
>>>>> - Added the autogeneratedISSN attribute to <rfc>.
>>>> I still don't understand what the "autogenerated" is about.
>>> The draft says:
>>> Holds the ISSN of the RFC series at the time of publication.
>>> This is filled in by the RFC Processor.
>>> If it is filled in by the RFC Processor, it is autogenerated
>> If it can be filled automatically by the RFC Processor, why does it need to be there in the first place?
> The canonical XML needs a place to put it; this is that place.
I disagree that something needs to be in the canonical version if it has
a constant default value.
>> If ISSN numbers *do* change in the future, it seems to be clearer to allow the author to specify it, instead of having to wait for an updated version of the RFC processor...
> This is only useful in RFCs, not Internet Drafts, so the author is not specifying it at all. If we get to a place where the RFC Production Center needs to change the value and cannot get their own tool updated to do so, we have much bigger problems.
When I say "author" I refer to people authoring the documents, that
includes the people in the RFC Production Center.
>>>> Also, it seems to be just another case of "alternateURI".
>>> An ISSN is not a URI. It is a string, currently "2070-1721".
>> RFC 3044 defines a URN namespace, thus every ISSN has a URI.
> That would be relevant if RFCs listed the series ISSN as a URI, but they don't. If we want to make that change, it would probably be a Style Guide issue.
You are confusing the XML source with what gets displayed.
The XML format can contain
and the processor can find and convert it to:
Best regards, Julian
More information about the rfc-interest