RE: BCP97bis

[[e-mail]]

> This goes into the same mix as "SDO's rethinking business model".
> Surely IEEE would benefit from working citations from IETF to IEEE
> documents, in a form that IEEE commits to stability.


> https://www.w3.org/blog/news/archives/2875

> References to resources that can't be read by IETF reviewers
> should not be accepted -- perhaps there were some cases in the
> past but things have changed.

Speaking as a media type reviewer, I require free access to the relevant
standards before I'll review a media type in the standards tree. This has led
various special arrangements to access specifications that would otherwise cost
$$$.

Note that this doesn't mean that free access is required for everyone. The
requirements for media types in the standards tree are that there be a  stable,
publicly available specification. Free availability is not part of it.

> References to resources that are available now but you're worried they will
> be moved or exhobitantly paywalled or lost -- keep "if needed" copies.

While I'm not aware of it happening, it's theoretically possible for a
standards organization to fail and take all of its specifications with it,
just like any other organization.

In the case of media types, what constitutes a standards organization able to
register types in the standards tree is up to the IESG to access. In theory
that assessment includes an accessment of the organizations likely stability.

				Ned

> Just to take "stability of reference" off the table. I read of legal
> documents and judements being subject to this for similar archival goals.

> --
> https://LarryMasinter.net https://interlisp.org