Er, if you're going to do that, why don't you just accept any source format? Mike Rosen, Brian writes: > I proposed allowing XML format of Internet Drafts be made available > if they exist. Period. > > I specifically DO NOT propose changing the RFC process in any way. > I specifically DO NOT propose anything but an OPTIONAL submission > of xml; ASCII text must always be submitted, as it is now. > If you have xml, send it, and we'll post it. That's it. > I think I have consistently argued against expanding this > proposal. > > Yeah, I know about camel's noses, but I agree with John that the > proposal useful and harmless. > > Brian > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Vernon Schryver [mailto:vjs@calcite.rhyolite.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 6:51 PM > > To: ietf@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: A modest proposal - allow the ID repository to hold xml > > > > > > > From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> > > > > > ... > > > (1) As an/the authoritative format, plain ASCII text, plus > > > whatever additional format(s) the RFC Editor decides to permit > > > to support drawings, etc., should almost certainly remain the > > > target for the reasons you identify. ... > > > > > (2) If a group of people, such as a WG, are collaborating on the > > > development of a document, having the working format (whatever > > > it is) readily available would seem to be an advantage. This > > > should not make that format authoritative, or attach any special > > > importance or validation to it relative to other formats. > > > > That sounds fine or at least tolerable. > > > > > Now I think that all that Brian proposed originally was that the > > > XML format of Internet Drafts be made available when it happened > > > to exist. Even though that might be letting the proverbial > > > camel's nose into the tent, it strikes me as basically harmless > > > and probably useful. > > > > yes. > > > > > Did I misunderstand him? Do we disagree about part of the above > > > and, if so, which part? > > > > My possibly mistaken impression of Brian's most recent position is > > that he would support XML for the official documents. Regardless of > > his position, other people have clearly come out in favor XML for the > > official format. The frequently mentioned hyperlinks among documents > > such as for authors would be rather boring if the links are only among > > documents that expire after 6 months. More powerful searching among > > I-Ds would be useful, but the real power would be searching among > > RFCs. Several people have written about converting old RFCs to XML. > > > > > > Vernon Schryver vjs@rhyolite.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > > This message was passed through > > ietf_censored@carmen.ipv6.cselt.it, which is a sublist of > > ietf@ietf.org. Not all messages are passed. Decisions on what > > to pass are made solely by Raffaele D'Albenzio. > > > >