Smith,
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 24, 2018, at 12:52 PM, Kennedy, Smith (Wireless & Standards Architect) <smith.kennedy at hp.com> wrote:
>> 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>> Should this also list RFC 8010 / 8011?
No, not for STD 92.
>>>>> 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?
Yes, this would have a separate RFC 8011 reference.
>-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20180824/69e33a7f/attachment.html>