On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 03:56:37PM -0800, Dave Crocker wrote:
There's no need to copy IETFdom Assembled on this, but I'm curious what
toolchain you're using and what limitations you've encountered.
My impression is that there are now a number of entirely competent xml
editing systems. I happen to use oXygen.
Oxygen looks like an interesting tool, but I wasn't able to readily see
that it applies stylesheets to XML to produce printable/readable
documents. For example, can I go from a docbook document to
cmaera-ready postscript/pdf using oxygen? Or xml2rfc -> txt? If so,
your argument is better than I thought; if not, I think that's a sign
that we're not ready to move. Yet.
I don't think editing systems by themselves are a reason to go to an XML
format. Again, I think that making the RFC content and metadata
available to both machines & humans is facilitated by an XML format.
[snip]
the reason xml is interesting is that it makes editing easier, not just
display.
XML does not interest me for that reason.
--
Ted Faber
http://www.isi.edu/~faber PGP: http://www.isi.edu/~faber/pubkeys.asc
Unexpected attachment on this mail? See http://www.isi.edu/~faber/FAQ.html#SIG
pgp44Cr8kam0G.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf