On Tue April 5 2005 15:30, Alex Rousskov wrote:
On Wed, 2005/03/02 (MST), <blilly(_at_)erols(_dot_)com> wrote:
I've suggested (via Reply-To) discussion on the IETF list.
Bruce,
Thanks a lot for reviewing and commenting on the draft!
I am preparing a revision to address Last Call comments.
I am not on the IETF list anymore (too much noise), so I am CCing Tools
discussion list instead. Please feel free to forward elsewhere.
I'm copying the IETF list for closure.
It seems odd that there is no provision for upload of nroff source
(RFC 2223) mentioned in sections 7 and 8 of the draft.
The motivation for uploading XML sources is that they are used by tools
and humans processing submitted drafts.
Likewise for nroff source.
For example, RFC Editor is often
using authors' XML sources.
While I have no data to either confirm or refute that assertion, RFC
2223 section 3 and the draft successor to that document both explicitly
state that the RFC Editor uses nroff.
We expect such uses to grow once XML sources
are easily available. In fact, the submission tool itself is expected to
extract useful metadata from XML sources.
I suspect that similar metadata could be extracted from nroff source,
at least if a suitable macro package (e.g. as described in
draft-lilly-using-troff) is used.
What would be the motivation for uploading nroff sources?
In addition to extraction of metadata,
o nroff is used by the RFC-Editor (RFC 2223 section 3); keeping the
same source format from initial draft through RFC production can ease
the workload for authors and the RFC Editor
o automatic generation of plain text, PostScript, PDF, HTML (including
line diagrams, tables, data formats, etc.), preserving page layout,
from single source
o (if a suitable macro package is used) no need to upload boilerplate;
provided that the (IETF copy of the) macro package is maintained,
up-to-date boilerplate can be generated automatically
o ability for authors w/o access to formatting tools to upload easily-
produced document source which can be used to produce a formatted
draft
I understand
that some folks prefer to create drafts using nroff, MS Word, or other
formats, but what would be the primary benefit of uploading those sources
to IETF repositories?
For nroff, see above. As I haven't suggested other formats, I have no
comments at this time regarding putative benefits attributable to them.
And if nroff sources are accepted, should we accept
MS Word and other source formats?
For me, source formats other than nroff are uninteresting (i.e. "I
don't care").
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf