> On May 12, 2024, at 4:47 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > < snip> > > We did, in RFC 2026. This whole discussion is only a gloss on RFC 2026. When the IESG reaches a decision whether to advance a document, they have to judge whether the rules have been followed. I really don't see that the draft changes the rules in any fundamental way. It makes it harder to cite a paywalled draft, which is a good thing, but it doesn't forbid it, which would be self-defeating. > > [The RFC 2026 rule is that "open standards" may be referenced, but its definition of "open standards" doesn't mention cost.] of course, in the days of RFC 2026, you had to pay for essentially all "open standards" so that was assumed Scott -- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
