I hate that maneuver. Instead, let’s just use the text of the ID at the time of request with a change in the boiler plate specific to the IANA specification required model. Have the IANA - as it already seems to do - act as a document repository for the stable reference associated with the code point. To be clear, the document in the IANA repo is not an ID even if it shares text with one.
That makes it clear exactly what the code point applies to, without begging the question of whether an ID is a citeable stable document. Mike On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 18:43 Tim Bray <tb...@textuality.com> wrote: > I like that maneuver. > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2024, 3:41 PM Salz, Rich <rsalz= > 40akamai....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > >> And this is where we run into problems, because the moment you change >> that boiler plate, you will devalue the RFC series >> >> I don’t know about that. The general population seems unable to tell the >> difference among the various RFC streams, as well as drafts and not. >> >> But if necessary, one possible fix is this: >> >> It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material **for >> other than IETF purposes** or to cite them other than as "work in >> progress." >> _______________________________________________ >> saag mailing list -- s...@ietf.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to saag-le...@ietf.org >> > _______________________________________________ > saag mailing list -- s...@ietf.org > To unsubscribe send an email to saag-le...@ietf.org >
_______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list -- rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to rfc-interest-le...@rfc-editor.org
