On 7/3/15 8:25 AM, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote:
Also, the use of DOIs is not exclusive to using URNs or other document
identification schema. As has been mentioned elsewhere in this thread,
DOIs were used first because discussions with members of the IRTF and
academics within the IETF suggested these would be quite useful. Since
they do not preclude other identification schemes and can be ignored
by people who have no use for them, I see no problem in assigning the
identifiers to RFCs.
This is a question: when a URN is encoded as a DOI, is that
DOI registered? I'm wondering about a situation in which you
effectively end up with two DOIs, one issued under the proposal
described in this draft and the other being a URN encoded as
a DOI. This clearly is not going to cause problems with their
function as stable identifiers, nor will it affect the uniqueness
of the identifiers (typically people who use these sorts of
identifiers for lookup don't pay much attention to the internal
structure of those identifiers), but it is a potential impact.
A document that describes DOI use in RFCs should probably
include recommendations for which DOI to include in citations.
Melinda