From: "John C Klensin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
It is also recommended that the technical publisher retains
control of the allocation of permanent identifiers. This is
especially true when multiple organizations (IESG, IAB, IRTF)
share a single identifier sequence. One way that this might
work is for the IESG to request "publication" or "publication
with early allocation"
Please separate this into a separate issue. To the extent to
which we are going to maintain multiple sets of numbers, some of
which apply to subsets of the others, the standards-track
reference ID (currently STD, but its assignment only to Full
Standards is another NEWTRK issue) and other reference IDs
should arguably be controlled directly by some IASA-associated
entity or contractor that is different from the technical
publisher. I understand this effort to be defining a "technical
publisher" role. If that role is to be one of a publisher,
rather than having broader standards-management functions, then
we had better be _very_ careful about what the IDs are and who
assigns them.
I agree with John here. I'm not sure I understand the case for continuing
current practice, at a minimum.
And, again, who assigns the identifier is a very different issue
from when that identifier is assigned.
Ack.
_______________________________________________
Techspec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/techspec
