Re: [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-allan-5g-fmc-encapsulation-04

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2020-07-03, at 18:33, Russ Housley via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> I assume that it is okay to use "[1] [2]" instead of
> "[RFC2119] [RFC8174]", but this is not the tradition.

Oh.  Numeric references are not good style in RFCs (neither are they current style, e.g., compare RFC 7322 — while section 4.8.6 is silent about that fact, it does say

   References will generally appear in alphanumeric order by citation
   tag.  […]

...and of course RFC 7322 uses the current style itself).

So you do want to say (kramdown syntax):

pi:
  symrefs: 'yes'
  sortrefs: 'yes’

Or, in RFCXMLv3 vernacular:

<rfc ... sortRefs="true" symRefs="true” 

(Symrefs is true by default in RFCXMLv3, but sortrefs is not.  Go figure.)

Grüße, Carsten

-- 
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux