Parent issue: Acronyms in RFC
Size (time): 1-6 months from start
Importance/Urgency: Medium/Low
Problem Statement: Once a purely internal reference for the RFC Editor, the acronym page has become a publicly available resource for authors to determine if and how certain phrases can be shortened. This is still something of an informal resource, with no common understanding regarding its authoritativeness. the site needs both a review and a decision on if it should be considered authoritative for the acronyms listed in it. If it is decided that this is the authoritative source for acronym expansion in RFC, then a process needs to be documented on how new acronyms are added to the list.
Tangential to all of this is a related question of how acronyms should be used in an RFC; whether they should be expanded only upon first use, upon first use in a section, or as the author(s) choose.
RSE Actions:
RSOC Actions:
RFC Production Center & Publisher Actions:
- note: RPC preference is to keep this an informal service. Making it authoritative could introduce confusion in RFC where old usage does not match current requirement
Costs/Benefits
Financial: if the decision is to make the acronym list authoritative, more staff time will need to be allocated to keeping it up to date; procedures for the editors will also need to be updated to require use of the acronym list
Project schedules:
Reputation: no major impact as long as a decision is made and clearly communicated
Estimated completion date: TBD
