Re: Call for comment: <draft-iab-doi-04.txt> (Assigning Digital Object I

On 4 Jul 2015, at 11:29, John R Levine wrote:

> > > 10.17487/RFC7556)
> > Ok, then the format is already decided (although implicitly), and should not 
> > be changed.
> They're still opaque identifiers, so the format isn't important.  I don't 
> know how to make that any clearer.
Because they have been published, we immediately have a question about 
persistence. We can now, from my perspective, not change the format as they 
have already been included in the RFC Index. Its a persistence issue.

We COULD have changed the format, discussed it, or whatever, but that point in 
time is passed.

   Patrik

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature