Can you explain where such a suggestion is made? As to the form that
comes AFTER the prefix, THAT is worthy of discussion, but that indeed
may be too late.
As I note in the draft, the part after the prefix is opaque. The DOIs
that the ACM assigns are two numbers that have no connection to
anything else I can figure out. The IEEE uses some combination of a
short abbreviation of the journal name, the year, and a sequence
number that does not tell you what issue the article is in.
In retrospect, rather than making them look like RFC numbers I should
have used a pseudo-random 10 digit hash of the date, authors, and
document title so people would stop complaining about RFC123 vs.
RFC0123.
R's,
John