So you would argue that RFCs should normally be used in paper form? This is
the only way I can see to avoid requiring internet access.
This idea seems sane to me. Given the current policy, the documents are
already not usable on the hundreds of millions of net-capable mobile
devices; a high quality paper version would avoid making the false promise
that RFCs are "available online".
On Mar 20, 2010 11:18 AM, "Donald Eastlake" <d3e3e3(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Martin Rex <mrex(_at_)sap(_dot_)com> wrote:
...
And if we should change anything about the Author's Address section,
then it would be to...
No. I have no problem with *supplementing* it with such a URL but any author
listed on the front page should have an email address, a postal address, and
a telephone number listed in the RFC. The model for an RFC is that of a
permanent book, not an ephemeral web page. I am opposed to the migration of
more of RFC content to links requiring Internet access and perpetual
maintenance.
...
-Martin
Donald
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf