Re: [rfc-i] Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty please) ?

[Ted Lemon <[e-mail]>]

On Oct 27, 2020, at 2:09 PM, John Scudder <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Needless to say, the concern does not seem valid to me. 

I think there’s legitimate cause for debate on this question; I’m not sure what the correct venue would be, however.

One solution would be for Henrik to simply document how to patch xml2rfc to enable pagination and page numbers in the TOC. At that point, anybody paginating a document would have to read the instructions for how to modify xml2rfc, which could include clear instructions on how to treat the output in terms of referencing it.

I think the main argument for doing this and not simply asking Henrik to fix the primary source is that there really aren’t that many people who rely on this feature, and so even though those people would benefit significantly from a fix, the overall risk really does outweigh the benefit. Of course, there’s no way to quantify the risk, so this can never go beyond conjecture, which means that ultimately the decision is a judgment call, not math.

_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest