[rfc-i] rfc docName for drafts

[julian.reschke at gmx.de (Julian Reschke)]

On 2016-06-09 20:49, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
> It seems that, for drafts, the convention is for the docName to be the
> filename of the text version of the draft. (E.g., draft-foo-bar-03.txt)
> This then appears on the first page of the document. And it appears with
> .txt even when the rendition of the document you are looking at isn't a
> txt document.
>
> Is this convention universal, or is it just within the realm I inhabit.

Actually, the convention is to leave the extension out, and it's 
documented like that in RFC 7749: 
<https://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc7749.html#element.rfc.attribute.docName>

> As we move to a world where the authoritative form isn't txt, and where
> the form typically viewed isn't txt, ISTM that this convention ought to
> be changed. Perhaps the file extension for the format should be omitted.

Yes.

> ...


Best regards, Julian