Parent issue: RFC Style Guide update

Specific issue: RFC Document Style Guide update (9)

Size (time): 6-18 months Importance/Urgency: High/Medium

Problem Statement: The RFC Editor is responsible for making sure the overall RFC Series uses a consistent format and style. The Style Guide (linked to from the RFC Editor website at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/rfc-style) documents the style conventions currently in use by the series and stalled in publishing an update over two years ago.

By remaining as an expired Internet Draft, the direction provided by the Style Guide is compromised, leaving authors and editors without clear guidance.

There will be some particular areas of controversy in bringing the Style Guide up to date (where “up to date” means “meet the current needs of the community”).

• Should the Chicago Manual of Style remain the primary form of style guidance? Is there something out there that would be less US-English-centric?
• is the current permitted abbreviation list acceptable, or do the assumptions that built it no longer apply to the current audience?
• if significant changes are made to the Style Guide, will tools such as xml2rfc need to be revised?

RSE Actions:

• Discuss with Sandy and Alice the story behind the attempted revisions

of this doc

• Revise current draft (v09) and publish for comment
• Seek input from RSAG, RSOC, RFC Editor, rfc-interest, ietf

RSOC Actions:

• input requested (the doc influences the series as a whole)
• formal approval required?

RFC Production Center & Publisher Actions:

• Provide input on any particular intent and history behind the current published version of this doc (v09)
• Flag any particular areas of interest
• Certain sections of particular interest to the editors may need to be written by someone in the Production Center (Sandy?)

Costs/Benefits:

Financial: n/a (no new tools required)

Project schedules: may impact other work in RFC Production Center depending on how much needs to be rewritten or reviewed by Production center

Reputation: significant benefit - update to this doc long overdue.

Estimated completion date:

insufficient info for completion date v10 draft due June 2012