[rfc-i] date-less citations

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Sun May 14 21:37:35 PDT 2017


On 2017-05-14 23:40, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>> is there an agreement about how to reference things that have no publiccation date (for whatever reason)?
>
> There are two main reasons:
>
> — the date is not given on the document (because the author didn’t think this was an archival document, forgot to date, …).
> - there was no publication date in that sense (e.g., for a web page that is continually being updated)
>
> For the first, I like to have some indication of “no date” (and we can discuss whether “n.d.” is Latin enough here :-).
> For the second case, the date-less reference may make most sense:
>
>> xml2rfc doesn't allow skipping <date>, but it does allow leaving out all attributes, and this generates a date-less reference entry.
>>
>> However, recently, I have seen many documents saying "n.d.", which I believe originates from the use of kramdown-rfc2629 (abusing the date element, FWIW).
>
> I don’t see n.d. as an abuse at all (RFC 7749, 2.13):
>
>    In the case of bibliographic references, the date information can
>    have prose text for the month or year.

But "no date" or "n.d." is not a date, not even in prose.

> The default in kramdown-rfc is “n.d.” if the date: member of the yaml is not given or null.
> (This is the default so the proofreader is reminded to do something about missing dates.)
> You can set the date explicitly to false to get a date-less reference.
 > ...

Thanks, do you have an example for that?

Best regards, Julian



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list