NWG Conventions: Documentation Conventions
The early rules for writing and circulating Network Working Group notes: be timely, not polished.
Crocker, S.D., "Documentation Conventions", RFC 30, DOI 10.17487/RFC0030, February 1970, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc30>.
@misc{rfc30,
series = {Request for Comments},
number = 30,
howpublished = {RFC 30},
publisher = {RFC Editor},
doi = {10.17487/RFC0030},
url = {https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc30},
author = {S.D. Crocker},
title = {{Documentation Conventions}},
pagetotal = 3,
year = 1970,
month = feb,
} RFC text
Network Working Group S. Crocker
RFC-30 UCLA
4 February 70
DOCUMENTATION CONVENTIONS
This note is a revision of NWG/RFC 10, 16, 24, and 27.
The Network Working Group consists of interested pleople from existing or
potential ARPA network sites. Membership is not closed.
The Network Working Group (NWG) is concerned with the HOST software, the
strategies for using the network, and initial experience with the network.
Documentation of the NWG's effort is through notes such as this. Notes
may be produced at any site by anybody and included in this series.
CONTENT
The content of a NWG note may be any thought, suggestion, etc. related
to the HOST software or other aspect of the network. Notes are encouraged
to be timely rather than polished. Philosophical positions without examples
or other specifics, specific suggestions or implementation techniques
without introductory or background explication, and explicit questions
without any attempted answers are all acceptable. The minimum length for
a NWG note is one sentence.
These standards (or lack of them) are stated explicitly for two reasons.
First, there is a tendency to view a written statement as ipso facto
authoritative, and we hope to promote the exchange and discussion of
considerably less than authoritative ideas. Second, there is a natural
hesitancy to publish something unpolished, and we hope to ease this
inhibition.
FORM
Every NWG note should bear the following information:
1. "Network Working Group"
"Request for Comments: X" (X underscored)
where X is a serial number. Serial numbers are assigned
by Steve Crocker at UCLA.
2. Author and affiliation
3. Date
4. Title
The title need not be unique.
DISTRIBUTION:
One copy only will be sent from the author's site to:
1. Abhai Bhushan, MIT
2. Steve Carr, Utah
3. Gerry Cole, SDC
4. Steve Crocker, UCLA
5. Bill English, SRI
6. Jim Fry, MITRE
7. Nico Haberman, Carnegie-Mellon
8. John Heafner, RAND
9. Bob Kahn, BB&N
10. Thomas O'Sullivan, Raytheon
11. Larry Roberts, ARPA
12. Paul Rovner, LL
13. Robert Sproull, Stanford
14. Ron Stoughton, UCSB
Reproduction, if desired, may be handled locally.
ADDRESSES
Below are the most current addresses I have. Please correct as necessary:
Abhai Bhushan MIT
Room 807 - Project MAC (617) 864-6900 X5857
545 Technology Square
Cambridge, Mass. 02139
Steve Carr Utah
Computer Science Dept. (801) 322-8224
University of Utah
Salt Lake City, Utah 84112
Gerry Cole SDC
7842 Croyden 2500 Colorado
Los Angeles, Calif. 90045 Santa Monica, Calif 90406
(213) 393-9411, X6135
X7057 (Sec'y)
Steve Crocker UCLA
3732 Boelter Hall (213) 825-4864
UCLA 825-2543 (Sec'y)
Los Angeles, Calif. 90024
Bill English SRI
Stanford Research Institute (415) 326-6200
333 Ravenswood
Menlo Park, Calif. 94025
Jim Fry MITRE
The MITRE Corporation (703) 893-3500, X355
Westgate Research Park X318
McLean, Va. 22101
Nico Haberman Carnegie-Mellon
Computer Science Dept. (412) 683-7000, X226
Carnegie-Mellon University
Schenley Park
Pittsburgh, Pa. 15213
John Heafner RAND
The RAND Corporation (213) 393-0411
1700 Main Street
Santa Monica, Calif. 90406
Robert Kahn BB&N
Bolt, Beranek and Newman (617) 491-1850
50 Moulton Street
Cambridge, Mass. 02138
Thomas O'Sullivan Raytheon
Equipment Division Headquarters (617) 899-8400
Raytheon Company
40 Second Avenue
Waltham, Mass 02154
Larry Roberts ARPA
ODS/ARPA (202) OX7-8663
3D167 Pentagon OX7-8654
Washington, D.C. 20301
Paul D. Rovner LL
Mass. Institute of Technology (617) 562-5500 X7211
Lincoln Laboratory B-115
P.O. Box 73
Lexington, Mass. 02173
Robert Sproull Stanford
Artificial Intelligence Project (415) 32l-2300 X4971
Stanford University
Stanford, Calif. 94305
Ron Stoughton UCSB
Computer Research Lab. (805) 961-3221
UCSB
Santa Barbara, Calif. 94025
AI ELI5
On this page
§1The Network Working Group and Its Notes
RFC 30, dated 4 February 1970 and written by S. Crocker of UCLA, is a revision of NWG/RFC 10, 16, 24 and 27. The Network Working Group (NWG) consists of interested people from existing or potential ARPA network sites, and membership is not closed.
The group is concerned with the HOST software, the strategies for using the network, and initial experience with the network. Its work is documented through notes like this one. Notes may be produced at any site by anybody and included in the series.
A group of people who want computers to talk to each other write short notes to share ideas. Anyone who is interested can join in and write one.
§2What a Note May Contain
The content of a note may be any thought or suggestion related to the HOST software or other aspect of the network. Notes are encouraged to be timely rather than polished. Philosophical positions without examples, suggestions without background, and explicit questions without any attempted answers are all acceptable. The minimum length for a note is one sentence.
The RFC says why these standards, or lack of them, are stated explicitly. First, people tend to treat anything written as authoritative, and the group wants to promote the exchange of ideas that are far less than authoritative. Second, people hesitate to publish something unpolished, and the group hopes to ease that inhibition.
You can share a half-finished idea. Nobody expects a note to be perfect, and even one sentence counts.
§3Required Form and Distribution
Every note should bear four things: the words "Network Working Group" and "Request for Comments: X" where X is a serial number, the author and affiliation, the date, and a title. Serial numbers are assigned by Steve Crocker at UCLA, and the title need not be unique.
For distribution, one copy only is sent from the author's site to each of 14 named people at sites including MIT, Utah, SDC, UCLA, SRI, MITRE, Carnegie-Mellon, RAND, BB&N, Raytheon, ARPA, Lincoln Laboratory, Stanford and UCSB. Reproduction, if desired, may be handled locally. The RFC ends with the most current postal addresses and phone numbers of those people, and asks readers to correct them as necessary.
Each note gets a number, a name, a date and a title. Then the author mails one copy to each of 14 people, and they can make more copies themselves.