Robert Elz wrote:
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 21:40:06 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch(_at_)ISI(_dot_)EDU>
| That's a problem when it changes page numbers (which end up being as
| useful as semantic tags) or figures. Or (as importantly) template or
| boilerplate text.
That's only true if the purpose of re-processing is to make the original
document again for some reason - which would only be useful if the
formatted version were not to be archived, but only the source, and I
don't believe anyone is suggesting that.
If you accept that the purpose of archiving the source is to ease the
production of a revised document, and not to reproduce the original unchanged,
then whether or not the formatting tool would produce the original,
unchanged, is completely irrelevant.
Sure - but if I cite an I-D, and have only the name of the I-D in the
XML source, but all the references' details are in the xml2rfc support
files, I need to archive them.
Those files change as I-Ds come out. While I can enter that info into
the doc, most people do not.
And I'm worried about changes to XML that render the result
uncompilable, not minor text formatting changes. See the changes to 2629
(sometimes referred to as 2629bis, although no I-D has been issued - and
we're currently using this 'bis' version) noted on the xml2rfc pages.
What happens when a real 'bis' WG is created? will the current changes
be supported into the future or not?
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Ietf mailing list