On Mon, Oct 7, 2024 at 2:20 PM Barry Leiba <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In my review [1] I did ask authors to change all references to > > "[RFCxxxx]" to "Title [RFCxxx]" because that is easier for people who > > do not have all 9000 RFC numbers to title mapping in their head (I > > only know that mapping for about 50 RFC numbers or so mostly in IPsec > > area). > > > > Having the title in the text makes it much easier for the reader to > > know what that RFC is about, without requiring him to google up the > > RFC numbers all the time (yes, you could also jump to the references > > section to check, but then you need find a way to get back where you > > jumped off). > > For what it's worth, I agree with this custom and have always wished > the RPC would change the citations to look like that when it makes > sense (perhaps on first citation only, or later if that citation > hasn't appeared for a while. It doesn't make sense to do it always, > because many authors have a habit of using a citation every time they > mention an RFC, and it would be odd to have them *all* include the > title. > > Anyway, because the RPC doesn't do this, I support Tero's desire that > we, the authors, do. > I don't mind either form. I just think we should use one form consistently throughout the document. It would be awesome if xml2rfc did this automatically. -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
