Re: archives (was The other parts of the report....

Melinda Shore wrote:

> On Sunday, September 12, 2004, at 04:02 PM, Joe Touch wrote:
>
> > It's still unclear - the document contains required wording about its 
> > expiration, under the same document. The two statements are in 
> > conflict in that regard.
>
> I have some problems with retroactively changing agreements, but
> your concern here is lost on me.  Email, private correspondence, offline
> discussions, and all sorts of things are referable.  You can't
> stop people from referring to documents whether they're expired
> or not, public or not, etc.
>
> Melinda
Even the IETF distinguishes between normative refs and non-normative 
(though it has a penchant for wanting to redefine those words too). 
Private correspondence is not citable as a normative ref, nor are 
(currently) IDs.
Put them up in a public archive and that assertion is no longer true. It 
becomes appropriate to use them as normative refs.
Joe

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf