It's not "rather than". The issues are orthogonal. The reasons for
getting an ISSN have been posted. ISBNs for individual RFCs is a
separate issue that would not be affected by getting an ISSN for the
series.
Donald
________________________________
From: wgchairs-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:wgchairs-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On
Behalf Of DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 9:17 AM
To: Ray Pelletier; Pete Resnick
Cc: Working Group Chairs; RFC Editor; IAB; IETF Discussion; IAOC
Subject: RE: [IAOC] ISSN for RFC Series under Consideration
Can you explain why you are suggesting using an ISSN for the whole
series, rather than ISBN for individual RFCs.
regards
Keith
________________________________
From: wgchairs-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:wgchairs-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Ray Pelletier
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 7:36 PM
To: Pete Resnick
Cc: Working Group Chairs; IAB; IETF Discussion; IAOC; RFC Editor
Subject: Re: [IAOC] ISSN for RFC Series under Consideration
Pete Resnick wrote:
On 5/21/08 at 1:52 PM -0400, Ray Pelletier wrote:
The Trust believes there are advantages to
indentifying the RFC
Series with an ISSN.
OK, maybe I'm getting suspicious in my (still slowly)
advancing years:
Nowhere in the message did I see words like, "The Trust
has consulted
with lawyers/doctors/priests/old-crusty-IETFers and have
found no
disadvantages to identifying the RFC Series with an
ISSN."
The Trust did consult with lawyers, old-crusty-IETFers, RFC
Editor, and found no disadvantages to indentifying the RFC Series with
an ISSN.
Did the
Trust actually find no potential problems (in which case
it would be
nice to hear that), have they not looked into it yet, or
did they
find problems and you're not saying because you don't
want to have a
big public discussion (in which case you're being dopey,
because it's
gonna happen anyway)?
That we know!
(For the record, had you said that the Trust did in fact
consult the
tea leaves and everything looked on the up-and-up and
they were
simply confirming this with the community, I would have
immediately
said, "Fine with me." I'm happy to have people to whom
such things
can be delegated, but I do want to hear the words "We've
done our due
diligence.")
We've done our due diligence, but we respect the community and
the process, and seek its guidance.
Ray
pr
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf