[rfc-i] Citation with DOI

Sean Leonard dev+ietf at seantek.com
Tue Sep 30 16:06:15 PDT 2014


On Sep 30, 2014, at 3:58 PM, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) <rse at rfc-editor.org> wrote:

[SNIP]
> The CMOS uses the doi: notation and states "Authors should include
> DOIs rather than URLs for sources that make them readily available."
> Using DOIs is new for many members of this community, however, so I
> think including a URI in addition to the doi: structure would be
> acceptable.
> 
> So,
> 
> [HASHCLASH] Stevens, M., Lenstra, A., and B. de Weger,
> "Chosen-prefix Collisions for MD5 and Colliding X.509 Certificates
> for Different Identities", IACR EUROCRYPT 2007, Lecture Notes in
> Computer Science 4515 1-22, 2007,
> <http://www.win.tue.nl/hashclash/ChosenPrefixCollisions/>,
> doi:10.1007/978-3-540-72540-4_1.
> 
> is fine for now.  We're still testing out guidance here, so this may
> change in the future.

Ok, I will use that format. Thanks.

Another thing: the article(s) that I am citing actually have a lot of reference numbers, including ISBNs and ISSNs. It is no longer intuitively obvious to me which ones should be included. The fact that RFCs are now getting DOI numbers is pretty crazy—on top of the ISSNs.

If all are available, is there a hierarchy of which should be included, and in what order? Or do we just go with what we feel is the most appropriate for the particular case?

Thanks,

Sean
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4825 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20140930/b121ff6c/attachment.p7s>


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list