- From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
- Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 20:19:45 -0700
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: tcpm@ietf.org, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
- Message-ID: <53e6ee78-f308-0618-0a83-0da28c29d2fb@isi.edu>
On 8/17/2016 7:43 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> > The only argument I've seen put forth is that "RFCs don't need to cite >> > things", which is false by nearly every RFC published. > Now you're misrepresenting what others have said. Please stop. Here's a list of everyone I can find from the list who has commented on the issue of citation. I agree that the quote above misrepresents your position, and I apologize for that. I leave the sum of everyone's words - hopefully quoted with enough context to remain accurate - as context for how to proceed. Joe -------- You: Again, I will point out that in the culture of the IETF, we historically have not cited the complete provenance of every idea, both because it's impractical and because it doesn't benefit the reader. {and in a later post:) Whether or not specific documents -- such as yours -- should be referenced is a matter for editorial discretion and eventually WG consensus. I note that no one else has supported your claims, but others have said (e.g., [1]) that your work probably isn't appropriate for the intended audience (HTTP implementers and administrators). {NB: you cite Willy, below) --- Eliot Lear: Perhaps we can agree that the reasonable course of action here is for Joe to (re)-recommend a compact set of citations to the authors, perhaps even in some easily consumable form to them (kramdown-2629 or XML)? -- Tim Wicinsk (in ref to Eliot's post): That sounds like a fine idea. I'll be glad to go through those. -- Alexy Melnikov: Instead of starting your discussion with words like "plagiarism", you could have just asked for information to be clarified and a citation/acknowledgement added? -- Willy Tarreau: I've just checked the two documents you referenced. They seem to be very well detailed but they are *scientific* research. ... ... ... Thus I think that Daniel's work completes quite well what you've done in that it directly addresses people's concerns without requiring the scientific background. {and later, addressing the references I asked to be cited) I think it would be nice that this is cited, ... ... A document validated by several people and giving links for further reading can help improve this situation. ... That's why I think we should encourage him to continue and give him all the reference he needs to have an undisputably good reference doc. --
Received on Thursday, 18 August 2016 03:20:39 UTC