[rfc-i] draft-iab-html-rfc-02: references

Martin J. Dürst duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Wed Mar 2 17:49:26 PST 2016

On 2016/03/02 04:48, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) wrote:
> On 3/1/16, 11:59 AM, "HANSEN, TONY L" <tony at att.com> wrote:

>> I see three choices:
>> 1) Require the processors to all follow the multiple pass rules, or act like it did by back-patching
> They still have to get the section number right.  Remember that <references> are in <back>, but are numbered as if they are in <middle>, which is surprising as a output formatter author.
> Another approach I'd be fine with is number the references sections as R.1 ... R.n, which would conflict with an Appendix R, which I hope never happens.

Another approach would be to not number (or otherwise label) the 
reference section. This is what a lot (it may even be the majority) of 
books and journal formats do, and what I personally find easier to use.

This may not solve the structuring problem, but hopefully would make it 

Regards,   Martin.

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list