Hi all,
On 12/11/24 2:56 AM, S Moonesamy wrote:
Hi John, Carsten,
At 11:48 AM 10-12-2024, Carsten Bormann wrote:
On 2024-12-10, at 13:52, John Mattsson
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Internet-drafts are obviously "permanent and readily
available", I don't see why that is debated. For registries wanting
RFCs there is "RFC required". I am against any registry saying that
"permanent and readily available" internet-drafts are NOT OK, but
pointing to a website outside of the IETF is
¦
This.
There really can't be any discussion on the facts here.
I agree with what you both said when I first read the text quoted above.
The Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS) was used as the style guide for
RFCs. The 17th edition of the CMOS said that it's a good idea to note
the date of access for a web page as the web page may change later. The
same citation guidance does not apply for printed material, e.g. a
published journal.
[JM] The RPC will also use dated URLs and/or commit hashes if they are
available to help point to the correct materials at web sites that
change frequently (e.g., for informative references to Wikipedia
articles or code repos).
The Instructions to Request for Comments (RFC) Authors, dated 20
February 2002, discouraged the use of URLs in RFCs because many URLs
were not considered as stable references. The RFC Style Guide, dated
September 2014, stated that the use of URIs in references is acceptable
as long as the URI is unlikely to change and expected to be continuously
available.
Nowadays, the RFC Production Center verifies whether the URI is
accessible as part of the editorial process used to produce a RFC. If I
am not mistaken, it does not verify whether the URI is unlikely to
change or whether the URI will be continuously available.
[JM] The RPC does assess links for long-term stability and will ask
authors if there is an alternative available if the link does not look
stable (e.g., it's linking to a personal site).
Copies of outlinks are saved through Archive-It.org. Links are crawled
quarterly. For more information, please see the RFC Series Consulting
Editor's post to RSWG:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rswg/OJ4xGqzsOXzg_LDXKt304KNKykU/
Best regards,
Jean
My understanding of the procedure for submitting an Internet-Draft is
that it is a hands-off approach. The requirements are in RFC 4228
(please see Section 7.5.1). I have come across cases where an Internet-
Draft was referred to as "IETF RFC draft". It's not within my scope to
decide whether it's appropriate or not to do that.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
