[rfc-i] citing historic internet drafts

Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Thu Oct 16 14:12:25 PDT 2008

On 2008-10-17 09:21, Keith Moore wrote:
> Does anyone else have the impression that we're too attached to the
> three words "work in progress" to describe Internet Drafts, and that it
> should be acceptable to use other, appropriately descriptive, language
> when citing a draft for non-normative purposes?

I want something that can be automatically generated by xml2rfc or any
other favourite tool, so I'm quite happy to accept a fixed form of words.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list