On 12.03.2010 04:42, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
+1 on all of this, one comment though:
...
As a pragmatic fact, XML2RFC has practically replaced the ASCII format
RFC as the canonical form already. The only obstacles are the IETF
tools that deliberately and insultingly make it difficult to access
the HTML version.
We could easily move to a world where all that was required to produce
an RFC was an XML version and that the RFC editor made all chances to
the XML version as canonical. Instead we have this weird little game
where the XML is converted into nroff, edits are made there and the
result becomes the canonical.
...
My understanding is that the RFC Editor indeed is editing the XML (if
available), and only converts to NROFF at the very end.
The only reasons I'm aware of are:
- more control over vertical whitespace and pagination (a point that
goes away if we don't insist on a paged format), and
- xml2rfc lagging behind in producing the RFC boilerplate de jour (which
is a fixable problem).
Best regards, Julian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf