Re: [xml2rfc] xml2rfc online: references to I-Ds and associated dates

[Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>]

On 12.07.2019 18:51, Heather Flanagan wrote:
> HI,
>
> April 1st RFCs should be the only ones with the day listed in the date.
> Everything else should be month/year. I don’t think this should
> necessarily be up to the author. That makes it something else the author
> has to consider, OR something the RFC Editor has to follow up on. It
> also becomes a semantically important implication to a far greater (and
> therefore more confusing) extent than the April 1st situation.
>
> So, while I think we need the option for a date, it should be hidden for
> the majority of RFCs. Internet Drafts have the version number, and the
> Work in Progress label, and changes to that are a different topic we can
> discuss later.
> ...

So then who is in charge to decide whether the day of month is inserted?

1) The author? (in that case, the citation libs would need to drop the
date for internet drafts)

2) The processor? (in which case it'll need an extra signal for April
1st RFCs)

This may have been not so important in the past. But in the v3 world
(AFAIU), there will be no manual post-processing step anymore, so
whatever the formatter emits will be what people see...

Best regards, Julian