martin.h.duke at gmail.com
Wed Mar 25 15:41:19 PDT 2020
What I was going to say in the queue:
Like mnot, I think Updated should mean "Amended". It may be worth it to
change the term just to create awareness to tighten the meaning.
But I dislike the idea of having "Extends" and "See Also". I foresee
foundational documents (like RFC 793) with a few pages of RFC references
before the text starts. That is useless. Plus the formal existence of these
categories will encourage people to use them.
If we would like better forward-tracing of standards evolution through
time, I would prefer if the datatracker and rfc-editor pages simply listed
the times the RFC was cited by other RFCs both normatively and
informatively. I think that would be sufficient and automatable.
TLDR, rename Updated to Amended, build the citation tool, and call it done.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rfc-interest