At 17.07 -0700 00-11-15, Hilarie Orman wrote:
>I've not seen the text in question, but this sounds very strange.
>Are you saying that draft references must be to paper documents?
Where below do I talk about paper documents?
I wrote "The URL is not persistent enough.". You have to have a name
of the document so it is possible to find it.
For many of them, you point to only a URL and nothing else.
Then we have the issues with references to Internet Drafts which I
mentioned in a second email.
paf
>I surely hope not.
>
>Search engines are perfectly nifty ways to find data when the
>URL is no longer valid and correct, so I'm confused by the
>advice you seem to be giving. Please forgive me if I am
>misunderstanding the discussion.
>
>Hilarie
>
>>>> Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com> 11/15/00 04:53PM >>>
>At 15.43 -0800 00-11-15, Ian Cooper wrote:
>>Is the fix to simply make the filenames/references look less like
>>internet-drafts and just keep them in their current locations?
>
>I would say, less like URL's. The URL is not persistent enough. The
>URL can be there, but a way is needed to find the data when the URL
>is no longer valid and correct.
>
> paf
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 18 2004 - 11:21:29 MST