[rfc-i] Categories of references

Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Thu Oct 2 14:17:50 PDT 2014

> So how about a tripartition of
> — normative (MUST read to implement this specification)
> — informative (SHOULD read to implement this specification)
> — historical (MAY read to understand historical background; NOT RECOMMENDED to read for implementers)

Overkill. We have too much bureaucracy already. The text you supplied
makes the status of such a draft 100% clear.

Historically, the only reason for splitting the references was to
semi-automate the detection and avoidance of downrefs to I-Ds and/or
non-standards. With good metadata we could have avoided even that.
Unfortunately it's become a sacred cow.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list