From: "Marshall T. Rose"
<mrose+mtr(_dot_)netnews(_at_)dbc(_dot_)mtview(_dot_)ca(_dot_)us>
To: "Dave Crocker" <dhc2(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net>
...
Until then, it is not appropriate to change the massively-stable base that
forms the encoding rules for RFCs. XML as an adjunct is fine. As a
primary form for RFCs? Not yet.
err, i don't recall anyone proposing this. if you're going to argue against
something, first make sure that someone proposed it, ok?
There have been several proposals recently and many over the years to
replace the current encoding rules for RFCs. Check some of the recent
threads at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/threads.html
As far as I can tell, no one who has ever used an RFC to design or
implement anything has made such a proposal, but that does not mean
that the proposals are safe to ignore. For one reason, most IETF
participants have not and will never use an RFC to design or implement
anything, unless your use of those words coincides with those who write
about "designing and implementing TCP/IP in the enterprise." I bet
that if a vote were held today, and if not only "legacy Internet
programmers" but all subscribers to this mailing list voted, ASCII
would finish behind HTML, MS Word, XML, UNICODE, and perhaps others.
Yes, I realize voting is forbidden and this is a good example why.
Vernon Schryver vjs(_at_)rhyolite(_dot_)com