[rfc-i] RFC Style guide

Bob Hinden bob.hinden at gmail.com
Sun Jan 30 19:08:54 PST 2011


>> Defining the difference between "frequent changes" and "more stable" will be
>> challenging.  That is, where is the line between the two.
> It will only be challenging if we operate with the rather amusing expectation that we are likely to apply the distinction with precision and consistency.
> Since I don't suffer that particular delusion, I think it's fine to assert the distinction in generic terms like these, and then let the individuals doing the work make the determination, subject to the usual community approval or push-back.
> This is not the sort of decision that is irreversible, so it really is ok for the 'wrong' choice to be made.  It can be fixed.

All true, but we will still need to some some sort of initial specific definition.

>> One thing that would be useful, is to still have a web site the points to the
>> current draft/proposed versions, and the "more stable" RFC version(s).  Going
>> to RFC versions, doesn't mean we can't continue to have web sites for the
>> policy documents.
> +1!


> d/
> -- 
>  Dave Crocker
>  Brandenburg InternetWorking
>  bbiw.net

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list