John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> But, if we have to assign a label for some reason, "UNKNOWN" probably
> isn't automatically it because, like "HISTORIC" [...]
FWIW, I like this one. I think we could say "UNKNOWN" and "HISTORIC" are synonyms.
My context goes back pretty far (maybe 20 years), but others have a lot more context than that.
I think the question here is whether "HISTORIC" means "MONUMENTAL". No, it does not, in this case. We could say "CURIO", but that's not quite right either.
One could go for terms like "ANCIENT", "ARCHAIC", or "RELIC". All of these denigrate the original text a little bit, so they don't feel right to me. I think we should refine "HISTORIC". The current definition is here:
I think we should say that "Historic" RFCs may have been written in contexts we no longer have.
thanks,
Rob
