[rfc-i] RFC Format - final requirements and next steps

Dave Crocker dhc at dcrocker.net
Fri May 11 11:30:49 PDT 2012

On 5/11/2012 9:50 AM, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote:
> hanks to the feedback from the community, I've modified the
> requirements for the format of RFCs (which ties in I-D format
> as well, though any actual change to I-D format is outside my
> purview).  I've collapsed two categories in to one (Edit and
> Review) since they have almost exactly the same requirements.
> RFC Editor requirements in most cases are similar to Edit/Review,
> but with a few unique ones important to the editors.  Archive
> and End consumption still vary.


Nice progress.

I suggest adding another category.  You currently distinguish 'need' and 
'want'.  I believe a number of items on the lists are already satisfied.

These should be labeled 'exists' so that folks can see what is 
/different/ in the lists from what we already have.

For example:

    Need to be able to update documents easily and see how they might 
look when published

is already satisfied.

I am assuming that a meta-need is to retain what we already have.

  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list