[Attempting to switch lists...]
The topic is finding current addresses for authors of older RFCs.
George,
We cannot change the RFC text; that's a rule. So the solution has to be external to the RFC itself. (See my comments in line below.)
The datatracker already has the information needed. Taking myself as an example, it knows that brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, brian@xxxxxxxxx, brc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, and brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx are all the same person. Also, my datatracker profile knows which address is currently primary.
Therefore, writing a function that delivers current addresses for the authors of RFC N, in cases where the tracker has this information, is entirely possible, for people who know how to access the datatracker's database. authors_of_rfc(2119) would return ("sob@xxxxxxxxx"). authors_of_rfc(1671) would return ("brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx").
So we could have an API and a web tool for this.
Whether the effort for this is justified is for discussion.
On 15-Aug-24 15:19, George Michaelson wrote:
I think I must misunderstand what you're trying to say, because this
reads as the other half, and does not address what I think Terry
proposed: The embedded values in the RFCs are held to be immutable,
but these contact strings are anything but immutable, as we all know.
user@host is not a constant which alters the normative force or
semantics of a document, its a reference to the authors.
It doesn't matter. Published RFCs are immutable. This can only be handled
as metadata.
If the author reference in an RFC was abstracted to a DOI or an ORCID
or similar, noting Phils comments to the need to make it trustable
through cryptography, then the document suffers no loss of
information, when the user@host has to change. That crytographic
management is btw completely outside the RFC process. It manages a
value expressed into an RFC.
An abstracted contact ID could be external, or could be internal. I
prefer internal, managed inside IETF process, and amenable to an XML
definition so it can be tokenised properly in the web display and
datatracker.
s/IETF process/RFC Editor process/
Ie its not "listing the emails" its tying the identity information of
the author to something outside of the RFC which can itself remain
substantively immutable, when emails change.
Certainly one could imagine this added to the metadata for an RFC,
but that would be a complicated discussion over in RFC Editor land.
Regards
Brian
G
On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 11:47 AM Brian E Carpenter
<brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Terry,
We effectively have that already. Try these:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/person/sob@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://datatracker.ietf.org/person/terry@xxxxxxxxxx
https://datatracker.ietf.org/person/brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The only issue I see is that if you have no formal role (lucky me!), no current email address is listed. That could be an option in the user's profile, or "author" could be added as a new role. (If you like that, we could discuss it at tools-discuss@xxxxxxxx)
Regards
Brian Carpenter
On 15-Aug-24 11:46, Terry Manderson wrote:
On 15 Aug 2024, at 7:54 AM, touch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Although I appreciate the impact this has to our RFCs, we all experience this (touch@xxxxxxx is no more as well), though perhaps not to the same degree.
I’ll step in here to defend Harvard’s decision; having an email available to someone who no longer holds an official position is a significant legal risk.
Emails, URLs, and even RFC numbers change (remember back when TCP was “always” RFC793?). Search engines mitigate this problem, as would (preferably) a bounce message from Harvard providing the next known email, at least for a while.
Joe
I'm looking at this from the impact to the RFCs and the link between RFC authors and other inquisitive minds. Especially while the author is still interested in responding to email questions.
I wonder if a level of abstraction can be created through an "author profile" that ties together all past author's address blocks and can provide the "latest known" address.
Just a thought.
Cheers,
Terry
