[rfc-i] Comments in the canonical RFCs

Paul Hoffman paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Mon May 12 10:39:32 PDT 2014


On May 12, 2014, at 10:12 AM, Nico Williams <nico at cryptonector.com> wrote:

> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)
> <rse at rfc-editor.org> wrote:
>> And this basically covers my concern and intent regarding comments in
>> the canonical version of an RFC.  On the balance, comments within the
>> canonical file cause more problems than they solve.  If someone needs to
>> comment on the XML used, WG or author notes to future -bis authors, or
>> offer some other minor clarifying point, I think that correctly belongs
>> in the draft, not the final RFC.
> 
> Ah yes, the RFC-Editor can always publish one more -NN draft, strip
> out all XML comments, then publish the RFC.  A very simple solution.

But a very wrong one. It would be completely inappropriate for the RFC Editor to publish a draft under the authors' names.

--Paul Hoffman



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list