Hi Mike,
> On Aug 24, 2018, at 8:16 AM, Michael Sweet <msweet at apple.com> wrote:
>> All,
>> 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:
>> 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:
>> The reference for STD 92 is just:
>> [STD92] M. Sweet, I. McDonald, "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1", STD 92, June 2018, https://tools.ietf.org/html/std92 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/std92>
Should this also list RFC 8010 / 8011?
>> If a general reference is ambiguous or not obvious, use the RFC reference form with a section reference, for example:
>> 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].
For this case, should [RFC8011] would a separate RFC 8011 reference be listed in the "References" section so that [RFC8011] unambiguously points to that?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20180824/52576f17/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4241 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20180824/52576f17/attachment.p7s>