Re: [xml2rfc-dev] V3 breakage in formatting internet draft references

["Martin Thomson" <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Oct 2, 2019, at 13:45, Julian Reschke wrote:
> > Well, there are always things the authors don’t provide that are
> > automatically added. And since we’ve been talking about making sure that
> > internal links to specific sections are included (which perforce MUST go
> > to tools references) the thought was to be consistent and have the
> > reference point to the same place that the internal section pointers are
> > going to send people. I think it would be confusing to have one set of
> > links go one place, and another set of links to somewhere entirely
> > different.
> 
> Well.
> 
> Right now the tools target is only inserted when none is specified, so
> this is not in line what you're arguing for.
> 
> Also, for RFCs the target uses https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcNNNN,
> which also is not the URI used for the section links.

I'm with Julian here.  There is no right answer, so don't provide one.  For me, today, if I was forced to pick, I'd probably pick the tools.ietf.org URL, but I don't think that that holds true once we start publishing decent HTML copies so that I can use real HTML over a txt2html conversion.  And others will of course have different preferences.

In this context, the bare name is sufficient for identification.