On 03/18/2010 01:52 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
On 18.03.2010 21:41, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
On 03/18/2010 09:37 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
And how are numbered lists a problem?
I thought it was a pain because I got comments referring to <x> and the
file I edited contained no <x>. xml2rfc generated numbers, people used
them to me, I didn't see them in the source.
In general I think the RFC format should use author-visible numbers in
the cases where those numbers are used in email, and might benefit from
being unchanged in the next revision of the RFC: Sections, list items.
Not references, people don't often refer to those by number in email.
It would be a simple exercise to write a tool that augments the source
with the generated section/list item numbers.
Damn, now I have to write it :-)
This is another proof that we need to define a subset of rfc2629-bis for the
canonical XML source (no include; day/month attribute mandatory; figures, tables
and lists numbered[1]. etc...), so the XML source submitted can be used to
generate the various formats people want.
--
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Personal email: marc(_at_)petit-huguenin(_dot_)org
Professional email: petithug(_at_)acm(_dot_)org
Blog: http://blog.marc.petit-huguenin.org
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf