[rfc-i] DOIs redux

brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com (Brian E Carpenter) Fri, 26 August 2016 20:33 UTC

From: brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com (Brian E Carpenter)
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2016 08:33:31 +1200
Subject: [rfc-i] DOIs redux
In-Reply-To: <CAA=duU37otKRMGUt6x0=S2dA942d-igN7vqfmSF83c-kkq4ahA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20160826015209.40064.qmail@ary.lan> <BA9E304D-0431-42DF-8206-6BD8459B6594@netapp.com> <CAA=duU37otKRMGUt6x0=S2dA942d-igN7vqfmSF83c-kkq4ahA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <da4bb4b5-ebbc-e3fa-564b-69002dce7327@gmail.com>

I think the specific discussion belongs over on xml2rfc. I was concerned here about the principle, and Heather clarified that
aspect.

Regards
   Brian

On 27/08/2016 02:51, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
> I recently had an RFC that referenced several journal articles, and I generated the references manually, including the DOIs. In
> this case it was no great burden, but I can see for the future that it would be nice to only have to supply the DOIs and have
> the rest of the reference generated automatically.
> 
> Cheers,
> Andy
> 
> 
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 4:54 AM, Eggert, Lars <lars at netapp.com <mailto:lars at netapp.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Hi,
> 
>     On 2016-08-26, at 3:52, John Levine <johnl at taugh.com <mailto:johnl at taugh.com>> wrote:
>     > I suspect it'd be more effective to do it the other way, put a DOI in
>     > the reference section, it can pull the requisite info out of the
>     > underlying database.
> 
>     agree with John, hence my ticket to add that capability to xml2rfc:
>     https://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc/trac/ticket/326 <https://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc/trac/ticket/326>
> 
>     The desire to have this functionality came when draft-irtf-icnrg-evaluation-methodology was processed by the RFC Editor,
>     which contains 90+ references where the majority have DOIs. Sure, we can ask the authors to do the work here and correctly
>     cite them, but without any tool support, that's quite a task. A proposition that lets authors simply cite-by-DOI is much
>     more convincing, IMO. (And the RFC Editor still needs to check all references w/o DOIs, so we do want to make it easy for
>     authors to add them, to reduce that load on the RFC Editor.)
> 
>     Lars
> 
>     PS: A quick grep through the RFCs finds 352 that contain SIGCOMM, 153 that contain INFOCOM and 566 that contain ACM, so
>     there are quite a few.
> 
> 
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     rfc-interest mailing list
>     rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org <mailto:rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org>
>     https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>