Date: 2005-04-06 10:03
From: Pekka Savola <pekkas(_at_)netcore(_dot_)fi>
I can't understand why you basically say that nroff can be typed
manually, but XML requires an editor.
I've never used an XML editor and have.. what, a couple of dozen
drafts, many of them RFCs already. I've used solely xml2rfc for
about 1.5 years now. Nor do I have plans to use an XML editor.
It's partly a matter of directive/markup mechanism (while there are
certainly exceptions, most troff formatting macro directives do not
require balanced start/end markup, and while nesting can occur (e.g.
in lists), the bulk of formatting (paragraphs and section headings)
directives are not nested, whereas XML, like other SGML-based formats,
requires balanced markup tags, many of which have particular nesting
requirements, and the balancing/nesting can quickly become unmanageable
for the human editor w/o format-specific software editor support).
It's also partly a matter of keeping the directives largely in the
background (mostly not balanced/nested, with simple syntax, and terse)
vs. overwhelming the text (by baroque syntax and verbose, balanced,
nested markup). One thing that typical *ML editors seem to do is to
try to hide that otherwise overwhelming markup by representing it more
tersely or by moving it to a different part of the display. Personally
I find it simpler to use a format that is terse and relatively
unobtrusive in the first place.
As an example, consider writing a paragraph using troff macros vs.
using XML with an XML editor and with a text editor. With troff
macros, one types a directive, which is terse (typically 3 characters
including the dot) and proceeds to type the paragraph text. At the
end of the paragraph, nothing special, just move on to another
paragraph, a section heading, a diagram; whatever. Using XML with
a text editor, there's a (relatively) verbose markup tag, which
itself requires balanced, matching delimiters, then paragraph text
(all the while mentally keeping track of the fact that an opening
tag has been entered and must be closed). At the end of the paragraph,
before considering what content is next, a matching closing tag (again
somewhat verbose and requiring balanced, matching delimiters) must be
typed. Using an XML-specific editor basically substitutes manually
typing tags by a search for a pointing device, selection from a menu,
etc. (avoiding typos while entering long tags, but interrupting the
mental flow of writing content to search for menu items, etc.).
Date: 2005-04-06 10:04
From: Julian Reschke <julian(_dot_)reschke(_at_)gmx(_dot_)de>
I am producing XML with a text editor as well. Plugins allow
one-keystroke syntax checks (== run it through an XML parser) or preview
of HTML (== display it in a browser with XSLT).
The need for external programs (because the format has strict balancing
and nesting requirements) is a show-stopper on some platforms (e.g.
PDAs).
The bottom line is that the goal is to produce properly formatted
documents. So long as that goal is met (N.B.!), any tool that does
the job and is suitable for the author(s) is fine. For those that
wish to use XML, fine -- enjoy! But my concern, particularly regarding
a document with the formidable word "Requirements" in its title, is
that there should also be provision for those who prefer to use
troff/nroff.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf