Steve:
Every so often someone suggests RFCs are not first class
documents and hence not comparable to, say, "real"
standards documents. Getting traditional identifiers attached
to them might squelch some of this nonsense.
I have the impression that we would be pioneering the use of an ISSN to
identify a standards' series, if we choose to do this. The "real"
standards from other organizations seem to be identified with individual
ISBNs.
Would the purveyors of nonsense be squelched by an ISSN, or emboldened?
Some might cite our decision as yet another example of the IETF doing
something different and 'non-standard'.
Marshall, to your point:
It is easy to find RFC's now, but it may not be in a century.
This may seem silly, but I think that RFCs will still
have relevance in a century and, having experience
searching for 100+ year old astronomical publications
and data, in my opinion, RFC's need to be cataloged in
libraries.
Libraries have running code for the maintenance of
intellectual property over centuries; the IETF does not.
I agree with you 100%. I think this is indeed a tangible and desirable
objective.
Best Regards,
Ed J.
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf