John C Klensin wrote:
--On Wednesday, 01 March, 2006 10:24 -0800 Paul Hoffman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
IESGers: do the external bodies who want permanent identifiers
need all of the identifiers that will be associated with the
document (the document naming system *and* the standards
naming system), or just a document identifier?
Having been in the liaison loop to one or two of them, here is
where I think we get hung up. What we have effectively told
them is that there is no standards-identifier until very late in
the process (years or never) and, consequently, if they need
something to reference for standards they have under
development, it is the document identifier. In the current
system, that would be the case even if 2026 were being followed
scrupulously and every Proposed Standard that we were not going
to discard was published at Internet Standard within 10 to 11
months. The result is that they are asking for document
identifiers. I suggest that is profoundly broken and that the
solution is not earlier assignment, or other juggling, of
document identifiers.
As Stephen wrote, what they *use* is the RFC number. I think that's
because we've trained them that RFCs never change, so they are excellent
stable references (much better than some things we refer to very
loosely sometimes, such as "ASN.1" or "Unicode", whatever they may be.)
What they may well want is STD-999.ps, but we haven't ever offered
them that. (This terminology refers to draft-ietf-newtrk-docid).
Brian
_______________________________________________
Techspec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/techspec
