Comments inline > On May 23, 2018, at 10:18 AM, Job Snijders <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 06:09:08PM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote: >> This errata report isn't wrong, but belongs to a bigger category of >> problems relating to how the IETF handles third party references in >> RFCs. > > Yes. Until then I fear errata may be the only way to repoint URLs.
Agreed to both. >> It's unlikely that the researchgate url will be persistent in the >> longer term, at least any more than any other URL. > > Maybe Greg Skinner will file a new errata when that happens? :-) Maybe. ;) In the meantime, I have some general suggestions: When giving a URI for a non-IETF publication (ie. something other than an RFC, BCP, etc.), the author should use the most “persistent” reference possible. For example, the link that one should use for a published conference paper is that provided by the conference, if available. The author should also note that signup or payment may be required to access the paper. This suggestion could go in section 4.8.6.6 of RFC 7322, and the section could be renamed Referencing Other Published Works. Perhaps the idnits tool could be modified to perform a simply sanity check on (at least) the URIs of non-IETF publications. Regards, Greg
_______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
