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.
--> -----Original Message-----
--> From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
--> On Behalf Of Nelson, David
--> Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 10:55 AM
--> To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
--> 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
--> > 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 mailing list