[rfc-i] URIs in references, was: Call for Review of draft-iab-styleguide-01.txt, "RFC Style Guide"
dhc at dcrocker.net
Wed Mar 26 16:06:43 PDT 2014
On 3/26/2014 2:58 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2014-03-26 22:39, Dave Crocker wrote:
>> On 3/26/2014 2:37 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> Possibly trust the stream editor, but individual authors cannot be
>> expected to have enough background or discrimination to judge this issue
>> reliably. And for documents to be useful 20 years hence, this issue
>> needs to be handled well.
> Nobody knows which URIs will work in 20 years.
No one know whether anything will work in 20 years.
But we have modes of consideration that distinguish between operations
that are more likely to work, versus less likely to.
Historically, a book reference was more likely to be viable, whereas a
house reference for a family was less likely to. (Not that the house
address would go away but that it typically doesn't apply to the same
folk, 20 years later.)
> However, we know which URIs *have* been stable until today. My personal
> experience is that well-maintained personal pages have a higher
> stability than some corporate pages. So from that p.o.v., the rule of
> thumb in the current spec is simply incorrect.
1. Be careful when using personal experience as a data sample.
2. I wasn't suggesting the corporations are more stable than humans.
Museums and libraries and equivalent efforts have a professional
orientation towards stable access. Marketing departments and most
More information about the rfc-interest