Re: A plug for XXE (Re: Alternative formats for IDs)

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> --On 13. januar 2006 11:44 -0800 Joe Touch <touch(_at_)ISI(_dot_)EDU> wrote:
>
> > This is my impression, from trying to use it as well. I was troubled by
> > 'yet another embedded text system' that necessitated editing source,
> > which seemed like a stone-age throwback when I abandoned such systems in
> > the mid 1980s (Scribe, nroff, etc. at the time).
> >
> > While I appreciate that, in theory:
> >
> >     1. there are WYSIWYG XML editors that *can* be loaded with DTDs
> >     2. Word et al. are moving to XML
> Bill Fenner has made a plugin available for the XMLMind XML Editor that
> gives you a lot of assistance in writing XML2RFC documents.
>
> I haven't used it for "production" yet, but it looks wonderful - not
> WYSIWYG, but WYSIPU - What You See Is Pretty Useful.
Pretty useful compared to text-editing the source code, yes. Compared to
WYSIWYG, still primitive, unfortunately.

If the goal is to allow the output - i.e., the RFC - to be useful for
data mining, why not allow the XML tags to be used *just* for the
portions that we expect to extract (i.e., for the data to be mined), and
let WYSIWYG editors format the rest of the document structure.

I.e., let each tool be used where it works?

That would allow us to generate the documents with whatever editor we
wanted, in whatever format we wanted, so long as the mined data were
extractable as ASCII text *with* XML tags. At that point, the choice of
archive format is decoupled from the decision of the editor, which it
should be IMO.

Joe

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf