--On Wednesday, 31 January, 2007 11:50 +0100 Brian E Carpenter
<brc(_at_)zurich(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com> wrote:
On 2007-01-31 00:35, Ned Freed wrote:
...
More generally, I have a problem with normative cituations to
BCP and STD numbers since the underlying document can change.
That's arguably OK for an informational citation, but IMO
normative references may have version dependencies that need
to be taken into account.
I think that is absolutely correct for technical specs. In the
specific case
of the IPR process documents, which Spencer raised, it may
well be that
the correct citation should be the latest version. (But not in
all cases;
when discussing the copyright status of RFC mumble, the
copyright rules
in force at the time of publication may be the correct
citation.)
Brian,
Except for the fact that the material being cited contains the
specifics of license and IPR releases, and promises to abide by
certain rules, by the authors. Authors can't reasonably be
asked to agree to something that might be published under the
BCP number in the indefinite future, so you are either stuck
with a document (RFC) number or a BCP as of a specific date,
which amounts to the same thing and is harder to track down.
john
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf