Re: rfc-ed reference style [Re: Last Call: Instructions to Requestfor Comments (RFC) Authors to BCP]

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

On Thu, 20 Mar 2003, John C Klensin wrote:
> >> >>    [10] Eastlake, D. and E. Panitz, "Reserved Top Level
> >> >>    DNS Names", RFC 2606, June 1999.
> >> >> ==> hopefully this isn't the reference practise, should
> >> >> be s/E. Panitz/Panitz, E./, right?
> > 
> > I have a problem of writing the author list as "Eastlake,
> > D., and E.   Panitz", rather than "Eastlake, D., and Panitz,
> > E."
> 
> Nope, I understood that was your concern.  It is a valid form
> according to several style manuals.  The rest of my note was
> an attempt to explain why.

Sorry, I didn't get that.

Ok -- the current format is fine as long as people aren't bound to 
miswriting the last author.

However, I'd strongly suggest adding some small amount of text to 
rationalize the editorial style, to avoid a thread like this occurring 
when people wonder whether the style is correct or not.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings