attachment
<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto">Smith,<br><br><div id="AppleMailSignature">Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On Aug 24, 2018, at 12:52 PM, Kennedy, Smith (Wireless & Standards Architect) <<a href="mailto:smith.kennedy@hp.com">smith.kennedy@hp.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">Hi Mike,<div class="">
<div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Aug 24, 2018, at 8:16 AM, Michael Sweet <<a href="mailto:msweet@apple.com" class="">msweet@apple.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">All,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Now that IPP/1.1 is an Internet Standard, we generally should just be referencing the collection of RFCs (8010 and 8011) and not the individual documents or sections within a specific RFC, for example:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><blockquote style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;" class=""><div class=""><div class="">The keyword attribute values defined in this document will be published by IANA according to the procedures in the Internet Printing Protocol/1.1 [STD92] in the following file:</div></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The reference for STD 92 is just:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><blockquote style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;" class=""><div class="">[STD92] M. Sweet, I. McDonald, "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1", STD 92, June 2018, <a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/std92" class="">https://tools.ietf.org/html/std92</a></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>Should this also list RFC 8010 / 8011?</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>No, not for STD 92.<br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">If a general reference is ambiguous or not obvious, use the RFC reference form with a section reference, for example:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><blockquote style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;" class=""><div class="">Most Authenticated User: The most authoritative user name for the current request as defined in section 9.3 of the Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model and Semantics [RFC8011].</div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>For this case, should [RFC8011] would a separate RFC 8011 reference be listed in the "References" section so that [RFC8011] unambiguously points to that?</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Yes, this would have a separate RFC 8011 reference.<br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div class=""><div><br class=""></div></div></div></blockquote></body></html>