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

Simon,

On 7/7/15 9:47 AM, Simon Josefsson wrote:

> > Where in the document does it state any such obligation?  This sort of
> > overstatement and misinformation is how we end up with a 100-message
> > sillyThread® on this mailing list.
> The document says:
>
> 4.4. Use of DOIs in RFCs
>
>    The DOI agency requests that documents that are assigned DOIs in turn
>    include DOIs when possible when referring to other organizations'
>    documents.
> ...
>    The RFC Style Guide will be updated to describe the rules for
>    including DOIs in the References sections of RFCs.
>
> This goes beyond the alleged scope of _assigning_ DOIs to RFCs, and this
> change in IETF processes is not covered by the abstract or introduction
> section in this draft, nor the announcement regarding this draft.
It is not an obligation but a request, and there is a very big
difference.  Further, if what we are talking about is adding a DOI a
reference entry, what is the big deal?  In fact, if there is a known DOI
all the better to find the source, especially for external references. 
Why *wouldn't* we encourage that?

And it is *not* a change in IETF processes, but in the RFC Editor
process that almost nobody will notice when drafting their documents.

Eliot

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature