[rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts

Carsten Bormann cabo at tzi.org
Wed Jun 14 01:37:04 PDT 2017

On Jun 13, 2017, at 23:02, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) <rse at rfc-editor.org> wrote:
> I can see a situation, in a purely historic context, where this might be
> unnecessary. 

(Ceterum censeo:)

I believe it would be a good thing to clearly identify “historical”(*) references (as in: here you can find out how this document came to be the way it is) as a separate class from other “informative” (as in: here is more information that helps in processing the technical content of this document) ones.

The rule being discussed would then apply to informative, not to historical, references.

Grüße, Carsten

(*) “historical" as in documented, archival, chronicled, not “historic" as in significant, notable, momentous, consequential, memorable, unforgettable, remarkable; famous, famed, celebrated, renowned, legendary; landmark, sensational, groundbreaking, epoch-making, earth-shattering.

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list