On 7/2/15 10:52 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote: > On 2015-7-2, at 09:30, Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@xxxxxx> wrote: >> This RFC must not be published. >> >> DOIs are the opposite of what the IETF works for: the technical >> standard is not freely available (88 swiss francs and I cannot >> redistribute it), not developed in an open way, and it is managed by >> an opaque private corporation (what about <https://open-stand.org/>). > True. But DOIs are also widely used, esp. in the academic community. For example, some university tenure committees will only consider publications as relevant that have a DOI. If we want to retain (or attract) academic participation, it would be helpful if RFCs could be made to count more towards tenure. The cost is minimal. People who dislike them can ignore them. People who benefit from them will use them. Everyone wins? Yes. Academia sets the rules, not us. Including the DOI is of value if it brings in more academics. Eliot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature