On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 15:37:18 PST, Fred Baker said: > At 02:32 PM 1/8/2004, jfcm wrote: > >Could it not be useful to have a "List of Comments" (LOC) for each RFC? > >Where experience about the RFC reading, testing and implementation could > >be listed by the authors (or a successor) from experience and questions > >received. > > These are usually found in the form of working group archives and > subsequent RFCs that update or obsolete the older ones, especially in the > case of standards track documents. The RFC Editor also keeps a log of notes > on RFCs when asked to. Actually *finding* something in the working group archive can be.. interesting. There is much that happens during the editing of a reply to an e-mail message that is totally different than the sort of expository writing that a LOC would need in order to be useful. They're different skill sets, they're different mindsets, and vastly different assumptions. For instance, this note probably won't stand well by itself 5 years from now, because I'm writing to an audience that has Fred Baker's and jfcm's comments fresh in their minds, and presumably have an interest in both the thread and what I have to say in reply to Fred Baker (hopefully, those that aren't have some combination of threading, killfiles, and delete keys ;) I remember a few times going back to the big-internet and MIME/ESMTP mailing lists, and even with the assist of actually having been a participant the first time around, was unable to track down specific things I remember having been written. Approaching it with nothing more than "Somebody mentioned something about that issue way back when", if that much - now that would be downright scary. The recent discussion about RFCs, 'Updates', and similar topics would probably be equally difficult to track down several years down the road.
Attachment:
pgp00397.pgp
Description: PGP signature