[Old-standards] Example web page...

[Robert Elz]

It seems that a collective good job has been done in "un-deleting"
the RFCs that shouldn't move from PS to Historic.

There's just one in there (aside from a couple that have already
been mentioned and are remaining "for discussion" or something) that
I don't believe should be historic.

That's 1752.

But it shouldn't remain PS either.   If it had been written today,
there's no way it would have been PS, it would have been a BCP.
Re-classifying it as a BCP now would perhaps be just a bit too
far over the top, but Informational would be a much better state
for it than Historic.

(I'd kind of like to see a new category of RFC types, for a few
of those remaining on the list for which "Historic" - as in,
"this is the way it used to be, but isn't relevant any more"
isn't really appropriate, and for which the interpretation
should be "this was a truly horrible idea, but we either didn't
realise it at the time, or politics forced it in anyway" - I have
a name in mind, but it isn't all that polite, so I'll skip that.
I suspect that is outside the ambit of this group though, so this
parenthetical remark never really happened).

kre

ps:  One minor request.   Could the comments on the web page that
indicate why an RFC has been removed from the death list
perhaps be made more visually distinct - maybe in italics, or
something like that (even just indented differently), so they
don't appear quite as much like the title of an RFC as they now do.