Hi SM,
On 4/2/25 11:35 AM, S Moonesamy wrote:
Hi Jean,
At 08:51 AM 02-04-2025, Jean Mahoney wrote:
[JM] Which standard is this?
It's NISTIR 8366.
[JM] This document has been archived at the Wayback Machine, and the web
portion of the RFC Style Guide [1] and the IESG statement on Inclusive
Language [2] are linking to its archive at the Wayback Machine until
another source can be identified or written. In this case, the contents
of the reference are still valid.
[JM] We don't know if [ZONEENUM] (the subject of erratum report 8090)
was retracted. We just don't know what happened to it.
Sorry, I was not focusing on the processing of [ZONEENUM].
Let's say that an algorithm is published as an academic paper outside
the RFC Series. The academic paper is retracted by the publisher (I am
not getting into the reasons for the retraction). What do other
journals/publications recommend as citation style?
[JM] If a retracted paper needs to be discussed, its reference should
include both the paper and its retraction information. This Retraction
Watch blog post [3] provides more information.
Best regards,
Jean
[1] https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/#inclusive_language
[2]
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-iesg-statement-on-inclusive-language-20210511/
[3]
https://retractionwatch.com/2018/01/05/ask-retraction-watch-ok-cite-retracted-paper/
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list -- rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
To unsubscribe send an email to rfc-interest-le...@rfc-editor.org
