Subject: ISSN for RFC Series under Consideration

From: Ray Pelletier <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 13:52:09 -0400

The IETF Trust is considering applying to the U.S. Library of Congress 
to obtain an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) for the RFC 
Series and would like community input to inform its decision.  The Trust 
may take up this matter on June 11th.  

An ISSN is applied to serials - print or non-print publications issued 
in parts.  A serial is  expected to continue indefinitely. Serials 
include magazines, newspapers, annuals, journals, proceedings, 
transactions of societies, and monographic series. Other SDOs, such as 
the IEEE, have obtained ISSNs for their publications.  A single ISSN 
uniquely identifies a title regardless of language or country in which 
published, without the burden of a complex bibliographic description. 
The ISSN itself has no significance other than the unique identification 
of a serial.

The Trust believes there are advantages to indentifying the RFC Series 
with an ISSN.  Among them,
1. Make reference to the series compact and globally unique;
2. Make the series, and individual RFCs, easier to reference in some 
contexts;
3. Results in accurate citing of serials by scholars, researchers, 
abstracters, and librarians;
4. ISSN registrations are maintained in an international data base and 
are made available in the ISSN Register online

According to the Library of Congress, www.loc.gov/issn/, for serials 
available only in online versions, the ISSN should appear on the title 
screen or home page and/or in the masthead or other areas where 
information about publisher, frequency, subscribing, copyright, etc. is 
given.

There is no cost associated with obtaining ISSNs.

Ray Pelletier
IAD
Trustee

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 14:04:10 -0400

(Removed [email-masked].)

I see no negative points to doing this.  It really seems like a no-brainer.  Go 
for it.

Barry

--
Barry Leiba, STSM, Internet Messaging Technology  ([email-masked])
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/l/leiba
http://www.research.ibm.com/spam

> The IETF Trust is considering applying to the U.S. Library of Congress to
> obtain an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) for the RFC Series and
> would like community input to inform its decision.  The Trust may take up this
> matter on June 11th.
> An ISSN is applied to serials - print or non-print publications issued in
> parts.  A serial is  expected to continue indefinitely. Serials include
> magazines, newspapers, annuals, journals, proceedings, transactions of
> societies, and monographic series. Other SDOs, such as the IEEE, have obtained
> ISSNs for their publications.  A single ISSN uniquely identifies a title
> regardless of language or country in which published, without the burden of a
> complex bibliographic description. The ISSN itself has no significance other
> than the unique identification of a serial.
>
> The Trust believes there are advantages to indentifying the RFC Series with an
> ISSN.  Among them,
> 2. Make the series, and individual RFCs, easier to reference in some contexts;
> 3. Results in accurate citing of serials by scholars, researchers, abstracters,
> and librarians;
> 4. ISSN registrations are maintained in an international data base and are made
> available in the ISSN Register online
>
> According to the Library of Congress, www.loc.gov/issn/, for serials available
> only in online versions, the ISSN should appear on the title screen or home
> page and/or in the masthead or other areas where information about publisher,
> frequency, subscribing, copyright, etc. is given.
>

---

From: "David Harrington" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 14:17:25 -0400

Hi,

The Trust has analyzed the advantages, and you included the advantages
in your post.
Has the Trust also analyzed any potential disadvantages? Can you tell
us those as well?

David Harrington
[email-masked]
[email-masked]
[email-masked]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] 
> [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Ray Pelletier
> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 1:52 PM
> To: IETF Discussion; IAOC; The IESG; RFC Editor; IAB; Working 
> Group Chairs
> Subject: ISSN for RFC Series under Consideration
>

---

From: Pete Resnick <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 13:20:36 -0500

On 5/21/08 at 1:52 PM -0400, Ray Pelletier wrote:

>The Trust believes there are advantages to indentifying the RFC 
>Series with an ISSN.

OK, maybe I'm getting suspicious in my (still slowly) advancing years:

Nowhere in the message did I see words like, "The Trust has consulted 
with lawyers/doctors/priests/old-crusty-IETFers and have found no 
disadvantages to identifying the RFC Series with an ISSN." Did the 
Trust actually find no potential problems (in which case it would be 
nice to hear that), have they not looked into it yet, or did they 
find problems and you're not saying because you don't want to have a 
big public discussion (in which case you're being dopey, because it's 
gonna happen anyway)?

(For the record, had you said that the Trust did in fact consult the 
tea leaves and everything looked on the up-and-up and they were 
simply confirming this with the community, I would have immediately 
said, "Fine with me." I'm happy to have people to whom such things 
can be delegated, but I do want to hear the words "We've done our due 
diligence.")

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick <http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated

---

From: Ray Pelletier <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 14:36:07 -0400

Pete Resnick wrote:

>disadvantages to identifying the RFC Series with an ISSN."
>
The Trust did consult with lawyers, old-crusty-IETFers, RFC Editor, and 
found no disadvantages to indentifying the RFC Series with an ISSN. 

> Did the 
That we know!

>can be delegated, but I do want to hear the words "We've done our due 
We've done our due diligence, but we respect the community and the 
process, and seek its guidance.

Ray

---

From: "James M. Polk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 13:42:08 -0500

At 01:04 PM 5/21/2008, Barry Leiba wrote:
>(Removed [email-masked].)
>
>I see no negative points to doing this.  It really seems like a 
>no-brainer.  Go for it.

ditto

>>Series with an

---

From: Pete Resnick <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 14:06:09 -0500

On 5/21/08 at 2:36 PM -0400, Ray Pelletier wrote:

>The Trust did consult with lawyers, old-crusty-IETFers, RFC Editor, 
>and found no disadvantages to indentifying the RFC Series with an 
>ISSN.
>[...]

Gotta love that! ;-)

Sounds like a fine idea to me.

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick <http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102

---

From: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 08:43:45 -0700

Seems like a good idea to me.

On May 21, 2008, at 10:52 AM, Ray Pelletier wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> IETF mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: "DRAGE, Keith \(Keith\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 15:17:25 +0200

Can you explain why you are suggesting using an ISSN for the whole
series, rather than ISBN for individual RFCs.
 
regards
 
Keith

________________________________

	From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Ray Pelletier
	Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 7:36 PM
	To: Pete Resnick
	Cc: Working Group Chairs; IAB; IETF Discussion; IAOC; RFC Editor
	Subject: Re: [IAOC] ISSN for RFC Series under Consideration

	Pete Resnick wrote:

			The Trust believes there are advantages to
indentifying the RFC 
			Series with an ISSN.

		OK, maybe I'm getting suspicious in my (still slowly)
advancing years:

		Nowhere in the message did I see words like, "The Trust
has consulted 
		with lawyers/doctors/priests/old-crusty-IETFers and have
found no 
		disadvantages to identifying the RFC Series with an
ISSN."

	The Trust did consult with lawyers, old-crusty-IETFers, RFC
Editor, and found no disadvantages to indentifying the RFC Series with
an ISSN.  

		 Did the 
		Trust actually find no potential problems (in which case
it would be 
		nice to hear that), have they not looked into it yet, or
did they 
		find problems and you're not saying because you don't
want to have a 
		big public discussion (in which case you're being dopey,
because it's 
		gonna happen anyway)?

	That we know!

		(For the record, had you said that the Trust did in fact
consult the 
		tea leaves and everything looked on the up-and-up and
they were 
		simply confirming this with the community, I would have
immediately 
		said, "Fine with me." I'm happy to have people to whom
such things 
		can be delegated, but I do want to hear the words "We've
done our due 
		diligence.")

	We've done our due diligence, but we respect the community and
the process, and seek its guidance.
	
	Ray

		pr

---

From: "Glen Zorn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:34:18 +0700

> may take up this matter on June 11th.

This idea doesn't seem harmful, at least, but I question the utility of
making references to the RFC series "compact and globally unique" or making
such references easier to construct.  I suppose that someone somewhere has
referenced the entire RFC series (as opposed to a small set of RFCs) but
I've never actually seen it...