[Standards-JIG] RFCs in pretty formats

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Fri May 5 08:56:35 UTC 2006

On Fri May 05 04:18:33 2006, Hal Rottenberg wrote:
> P.S. Why is it so hard to find RFCs in TOC-hyperlinked format?

Because the RFC standard format is text, so that's the one you 
generally have to cite, or refer to in most cases. This might be 
changing - the source format is usually xml2rfc, these days, so that 
might eventually get equal status.

http://zvon.org/ had a good one, but they replaced it with 
http://www.rfc-ref.org/, which is okay, but a little 
over-hyperlinked. (Like, every other word is a hyperlink.)

I find either, or both, to be useful when I'm actually implementing 
RFCs. (Usually I implement drafts, so I don't have the option but to 
get used to text.)

           You see things; and you say "Why?"
   But I dream things that never were; and I say "Why not?"
    - George Bernard Shaw

More information about the Standards mailing list