Re: I-D ACTION:draft-shafranovich-feedback-report-01.txt
Bill Fenner <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.rfc822 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 5/25/05, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > > > o References are normally unnumbered sections. > > > Can you provide a reasoning for this or is this simply something the > > community is used to? > > It is what the RFC Editor requires. Adopting the format of the final RFC sooner > rather than later often saves time. The RFC Editor has explicitly said that they don't have a position on numbered or unnumbered references sections. RFC2223bis itself is not consistent on this topic; when it mentions splitting normative/informative it talks about sections s and s+1, but 2223bis itself doesn't use numbered sections. Looking at the 161 RFCs since RFC3900, 150 of them seem to have 'normative references' sections; 142 of them are numbered and 8 are not. forbin% grep -li '^[0-9][0-9.]* *normative references' rfc39??.txt rfc4???.txt | wc -l 142 forbin% grep -li '^ *normative references' rfc39??.txt rfc4???.txt | wc -l 8 Bill