Re: Question about STD format...
Ryan Moats <jayhawk@ds.internic.net> Mon, 29 April 1996 15:02 UTC
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa11985; 29 Apr 96 11:02 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa11979; 29 Apr 96 11:02 EDT
Received: from zephyr.isi.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa09654; 29 Apr 96 11:02 EDT
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20) id <AA19146>; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 06:42:34 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20) id <AA19139>; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 06:42:26 -0700
Received: from privateer.windrose.omaha.ne.us (ppp33.nfinity.com) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23) id <AA09504>; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 06:42:19 -0700
Received: by privateer.windrose.omaha.ne.us; Mon Apr 29 08:41 CDT 1996
Message-Id: <3184C722.3D67@ds.internic.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 08:41:54 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Ryan Moats <jayhawk@ds.internic.net>
Organization: InterNIC Database and Directory Services
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4c)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: "John S. Quarterman" <jsq@mids.org>
Cc: Joyce Reynolds <jkrey@isi.edu>, uswg@isi.edu
Subject: Re: Question about STD format...
References: <199604261517.KAA28260@akasha.tic.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig-Sender: owner-uswg@isi.edu
Precedence: bulk
John S. Quarterman wrote: > > >Joyce- > > > >Not sure if this is the right place to bring this up, but I think it > >might be so here goes... > > > >We are setting up a couple of Z39.50 1992 databases for things like the > >RFC, FYI, STD series, the internet-drafts, etc. I have discovered that > >while I-Ds, RFCs, and FYIs have some document identification embedded > >in them, the STDs don't. The only consistent information is the > >RFC number. I have gone throguh and embedded the STD number in the > >header a la the FYI series. How do I go about getting these out > >to the world? > > Since STD numbers refer at different times to different RFCs, > wasn't the plan for STDs to have the current RFC number specified > in a master document, rather than in the current RFC? > > Thanks, > John > That may be true. If so, it creates some difficulties for what we are trying to do (sigh)... Ryan
- Re: Question about STD format... John S. Quarterman
- Re: Question about STD format... Ryan Moats