[rfc-i] Why should the RFC Style Guide be an RFC?

"Martin J. Dürst" duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Wed Mar 12 01:35:43 PDT 2014

On 2014/03/12 16:20, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2014-03-12 01:05, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> Greetings again. The RFC Style Guide is in IETF Last Call, and this is
>> a very good time to ask: why should this be an RFC at all? In the
>> introduction to the current draft, it says:
>> ...
> I believe that publishing the style guide as RFC is exactly the right
> thing to do. When we can't express the RFC style as RFC, we have a problem.

This is a valid point. However, I'm very much on Paul's side, because 
everybody having to look in two different places and putting pieces 
together is useless work.

> With respect to updates: RFCs can be revised. There's no reason why the
> situation needs to be as bad as before :-).

We can improve on what was before, but I'd prefer the RFC editor 
spending cycles and money on things that matter to the Internet, rather 
than on RFCs about how to write RFCs.

Maybe there's a third way: Publish the 'full' RFC, but let it *very* 
explicitly state that this is only a snapshot. Keep the full style guide 
as a Web page and update it as needed.

Regards,   Martin.

> Best regards, Julian
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list