Re: Last Call: <draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-12.txt> (Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs) to Best Current Practice

[Barry Leiba <[e-mail]>]

>> I think the change I've already proposed is a reasonable compromise.
>> "In most cases" isn't "in all cases".
>
> I accept that you think that:-)
>
> Do you think "in most cases" would have meant you and the author
> concerned would/would-not have had that discussion a couple of years
> ago? If you would have had it anyway, then I don't think "in most
> cases" is usefully different from the OLD text.

I think I'd have had it even with your text, because I simply think
it's monstrously stupid to intentionally retain obsolete references
when we have a newer reference available and it's easy to correct (I
had even provided text).

> And to go back to the nub or the argument, I don't think we have IETF
> consensus for that (but you do). I note that so far we only have people
> disagreeing with the current draft text.

I don't agree with that: Donald said this:
"The only constant
principle, I think, is that the reference(s) for the registry and for
the code points in that registry should be the best references
reasonably available..."

SM said this:
"Is it useful to point to RFCyyyy when the information about the code
point in RFCxxxx?  I don't think so."

Both of those seem to be arguing for updating the references to be current.

But let's put the specific options there and ask:

Community... which of these (or none) do you think reflects the best
practice that should be in BCP 26?:

OLD
   If information for registered items has been or is being moved to
   other documents, then, of course, the registration information should
   be changed to point to those other documents. In no case is it
   reasonable to leave documentation pointers to the obsoleted document
   for any registries or registered items that are still in current use.

NEW-1
   If information for registered items has been or is being moved to
   other documents, then the registration information should be changed
   to point to those other documents. In most cases, documentation
   references should not be left pointing to the obsoleted document
   for registries or registered items that are still in current use.

NEW-2
   If information for registered items has been or is being moved to
   other documents, then the registration information should be changed
   to point to those other documents. Ensuring that registry entries
   point to the most recent document as their definition is encouraged
   but not necessary as the RFC series meta-data documents the relevant
   relationships (OBSOLETED by etc) so readers will not be misled.

(And, Stephen, for what it's worth I'd be OK with a variant of your
version if the last sentence said, simply, "Ensuring that registry
entries point to the most recent document as their definition is
encouraged but not required.")

-- 
Barry