Hi, On 2021-2-25, at 23:21, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 26-Feb-21 06:29, Lars Eggert wrote: >> One thing we did to increase the value of RFCs to academics was to assign them DOIs, which at least for universities in some geos is a prerequisite to even recognizing RFCs as academic output. > > Nevertheless, it is in general hard to get RFCs recognised as valuable for tenure and promotion purposes, compared to more traditional publication streams such as highly-rated journals. completely agreed. DOIs don't fully solve the problem, they are a first required step. Some tenure committees operate under rules that don't makes it difficult to consider evaluating something that doesn't have a DOI. > That's one reason we did https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1672308.1672315 but I'm not sure it has had much impact. Yes, that is an invaluable document when RFCs are able to be considered for evaluation. Thanks, Lars
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
