Julian Reschke wrote:
IMHO it would be a good idea in the sense of "own dogfood" not to
serve XHTML content with media type text/html.
Matter of taste, from my POV XHTML 1.0 transitional is the best way
to create backwards compatible (HTML 3.2) content "visible with any
browser".
Or as the ion-ion-format draft puts it: "no fancy features". If my
old browser sees some real XML it simply starts my text editor... ;-)
The HTML output of xml2rfc is rather ugly with my browser, and its
nice unpaginated output doesn't offer meta-data and I18N, tough :-(
I18N?
Non-ASCII, the xml2rfc "txt" or "unpg" output is ASCII. The HTML of
rfcmarkup is very nice, but at that point all meta-data and non-ASCII
is already lost. Maybe xml2rfc should get a new XHTML output option,
not your "dogfod" of course, normal XHTML 1.0 transitional text/html.
Frank
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf