On 16 September 2013 19:06, John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>> If the goal is to include contact info for the authors in the >>> document and in fact you can't be contacted using the info is >>> it contact info? >> >> While I didn't say that the goal was to provide contact >> info[*], an individual can do so through their ORCID profile, >> which they manage and can update at any time. > > The goal of the "author's address" section of the RFCs is > _precisely_ contact information. See, e.g., > draft-flanagan-style-02 and its predecessors. I'm sure it is; but nor did I mention the "author's address" section - I'm credited under "Acknowledgments". > I can see some advantages in including ORCID or some similar > identifier along with the other contact information > [But] I'd consider it useful supplemental > information, not a replacement for the contact information that > is now supposed to be present. Nor have I argued that it should be. > Treating an ORCID (or equivalent) as supplemental would also > avoid requiring the RSE to inquire about guarantees about the > permanence and availability of the relevant database. It may be > fine; I'd just like to avoid having to go there. Even if the ORCID database vanishes (which is highly unlikely) the existing UIDs will still be unique. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk