Re: RFC archival format, was: Re: More liberal draft formatting standard

Douglas Otis wrote:
> ...
> Use of xml2rfc conversions has uncovered some odd quirks.  The tool does 
> not cache bibliographic database selections.  Either this works on-line, 
> or the entire database needs to be local.  Not to diminish the service 
> offered by Carl Malamud, occasional sporadic connections to the 
> xml.resource.org servers can be a cause of angst for authors who have 
> ...

If it hurts, don't do it.

Translation: if you don't want to rely on network resources, keep a 
local copy. I recommend that anyway, so that the xml2rfc input file is 
self-contained.
Relying on external references for internet drafts is fragile anyway: 
that the reference automatically updates to the latest version may look 
handy, but may cause authors to miss important changes.
> ...
> not obtained the entire tarred xml bibliographic database.  Lately, the 
> dependability of the xml2rfc approach has become less reliable when 
> dealing with cryptic entries and beta TCL needed to generate I-D 
> boilerplate language as required by nit checker.
> ...
The "experimental" version (http://xml.resource.org/experimental.html) 
is as stable as predecessor versions; the main reason it hasn't been 
released is that the authors (IMHO) expected more boilerplate changes to 
occur.
And what exactly do you mean by "cryptic entries"?

> This makes one wonder whether there could be a better way.  A hybrid 
> approach might offer the similar features found in xml2rfc with the 
> simpler the inputs supported by 'roff.  This would not exclude the use 
> of Word, but would not depend upon any of Word's content automations.  
> Perhaps a bit of Perl could provide the pre and post processors to 
> handle something that resembles the xml2rfc front section.  While roff 
> is not perfect, it has been more stable than other WISIWYG word 
> processors and, when used in conjunction with separate pre/post 
> processors, can generate the desired alternative outputs.
I think the right approach is to either help maintaining the TCL code, 
or to rewrite xml2rfc in a different language.
BR; Julian



_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf