[rfc-i] request to deprecate numeric citations in xml2rfc

Joe Touch touch at ISI.EDU
Wed Jan 12 07:26:26 PST 2005

Paul Hoffman / VPNC wrote:
>> There are other versions that work:
>>     Touch85
>>     Touch1985
>>     Touch-85
>> etc. It doesn't matter which one, but it'd be useful to at least 
>> suggest  something (even if it isn't desirable to enforce).
> Those are better, but still not as good as strings that simply describe 
> what the reference is for, such as:
>      AuthMethods
>      RFCWriting
>      TaoOfTheIETF
> Please do *not* standardize on an author-based naming system.

I disagree; absent authors or RFCs for that one series, there's no good 
way to know how to cite a paper, which means there's no good way to 
determine whether a paper is in the (often long list) of references. Did 
they name it TaoOfTheIETF? or IETFGeneralInfo?

I have referred to a few document series that use the author version; is 
there some reason RFCs are so unique that they need to have such an 
informal way of citing?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 254 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20050112/ba6d89c7/signature.bin

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list