David, Never-the-less, it can happen. Normative references - at least by some definitions of the term - can be to types of documents than RFCs. However, it is usually the case that papers and other documents written in French, Russian, German, etc. are made available in - or can be made available in - English for use in references from documents written in English. This is - indeed - the reason why the IETF allows for translations of RFCs: so that they can, in turn, be used as references in documents written in other languages. -- Eric --> -----Original Message----- --> From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] --> On Behalf Of Nelson, David --> Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 10:55 AM --> To: ietf@xxxxxxxx --> Subject: RE: Examples of translated RFCs --> --> JFC (Jefsey) Morfin writes... --> --> > So , IMHO, the IETF urgency is today the other way around: --> > incorporating into RFC standards, practices or tables --> authoritatively --> > written or thought in another language than English, or in English --> > using normative non-ASCII art drafts or using term in a meaning --> > foreign to the IETF. --> --> If all RFCs are written in English, basically so that there --> is at most --> one additional language in which one must be fluent to --> understand and --> implement the protocols described therein, wouldn't it defeat the --> purpose to have normative references written in other languages? --> --> --> _______________________________________________ --> Ietf mailing list --> Ietf@xxxxxxxx --> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf --> _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf