Simon, On 7/7/15 9:47 AM, Simon Josefsson wrote: >> Where in the document does it state any such obligation? This sort of >> overstatement and misinformation is how we end up with a 100-message >> sillyThread® on this mailing list. > The document says: > > 4.4. Use of DOIs in RFCs > > The DOI agency requests that documents that are assigned DOIs in turn > include DOIs when possible when referring to other organizations' > documents. > ... > The RFC Style Guide will be updated to describe the rules for > including DOIs in the References sections of RFCs. > > This goes beyond the alleged scope of _assigning_ DOIs to RFCs, and this > change in IETF processes is not covered by the abstract or introduction > section in this draft, nor the announcement regarding this draft. > It is not an obligation but a request, and there is a very big difference. Further, if what we are talking about is adding a DOI a reference entry, what is the big deal? In fact, if there is a known DOI all the better to find the source, especially for external references. Why *wouldn't* we encourage that? And it is *not* a change in IETF processes, but in the RFC Editor process that almost nobody will notice when drafting their documents. Eliot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature