->> Some authors = > No ;
->> Some authors = > yes;
->> Libarian = > yes;
->> Historian => yes;
->> IETF => no;
->Interesting set of categories, there. Who's
->the "IETF?"
I could (&would) say that it is the entity indirectly
responsible
for ID/RFC publications with the rights of such publications
residing with the ISOC....
You're missing the point. I gather that you're
trying to imply that there's some sort of
IETF consensus here, which there clearly is not, and
in support of that you're drawing some very weird
lines between what you consider to be the "IETF"
and what you do not consider to be the "IETF."
[BTW, it's "librarian."]
Melinda