[rfc-i] draft-iab-streams-headers-boilerplates-07 (was: Abstract on Page 1?)
sm at resistor.net
Thu Mar 5 16:07:01 PST 2009
[following up on rfc-i]
At 11:48 05-03-2009, John C Klensin wrote:
>So, just as I'd like to understand what people are advocating
>moving, I'd like to see if we can separate an objective (e.g.,
>"get the Abstract onto Page 1") from a mechanism (e.g., "move
>the boilerplate to the end").
Margaret suggested moving the Abstract onto Page 1. If we take
draft-iab-streams-headers-boilerplates-07, for example, the Abstract
starts on the last line on Page 1 and continues on the next page. In
RFC 2606, the "Status of this Memo" Section was three lines
only. The second section was the Abstract.
If we follow draft-iab-streams-headers-boilerplates-07, the "Status
of this Memo" Section is about 14 lines. Putting the Abstract
Section after that would move it onto Page 1. In exceptional cases
(Section 3.3), the document may contain an IESG Note which might get
the Abstract on the second page if the note is a lengthy one.
I suggest having the "Status of this Memo" as the first section
followed by the Abstract Section as that information is more useful
on the first page.
The "Copyright Notice" Section is 8 lines. If pre-RFC5378 material
is included in the document, there is 8 additional lines to be
added. The Copyright Notice can be after the Abstract or at the end
of the document. If it's at the end, it is not obvious at a glance
whether there is pre-RFC5378 material or not. A person can always
look at the end of the document for that information if the section
is placed at the end of the document.
If any structural material such as ISSN, I suggest putting them after
the Abstract so that the Abstract section remains on Page 1 except
when there is a lengthy IESG Note.
More information about the rfc-interest