Re: RFC 20 status change last call: References to appendices

[Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>]

On 2014-12-31 21:38, Elwyn Davies wrote:
> Hi.
>
> There are a number of references to "appendices" in this document  -
> Section 4.2 (footnotes 2 and 3) and Section 6.5, but the version of RFC
> 20 available online at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc20.txt does not
> have any appendices.
>
> It is possible that this is because the appendices were not reproduced
> when the document was put into machine readable form in 1999.  After
> some research, I suspect that in fact the references are to the
> appendices of the American National Standard (ANSI) X3.4-1968 - the
> references in the Section 4.2 footnotes to Appendices A5.2 and B4 almost
> certainly are.  I was unable to access a copy of the original 1968
> version of ANSI X3.4 (it appears that there are copies in the Library of
> Congress and the library at the University of Wisconsin but it's a long
> walk ;-) ). However, I found a facsimile of the 1986 version.  It is
> clear that Appendices A5.2 and B5 (as opposed to B4) contain relevant
> material (the 1977 update was apparently a very minor affair).
>
> If indeed the second case is correct and the RFC document never had any
> appendices, I suggest that an addition is made to the colophon to point
> out where the appendices can be found, that is ANSI X3.4-1968.  This
> doesn't quite cover the wording in Section 6.5 - are we allowed to alter
> this to point to the appendices of   ANSI X3.4-1968?
>
> If the original of RFC 20 did indeed contain these appendices, fixing
> the issue is a bit more tedious.
>
> Happy New Year,
> Elwyn

As attractive it might be to re-classify RFC 20, maybe it's better to 
actually work on a rfc20bis?

Best regards, Julian