Re: Last Call: 'Requirements for IETF Draft Submission Toolset' to Informational RFC

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



 In your previous mail you wrote:

   I deliberately wanted to make the poll binary, but my
   assumption is that 'neither' must mainly represent that
   proprietary solution. I can't imagine many people generate
   I-Ds using a plain text editor,

=> why? I used a plain text editor before moving to xml2rfc (xml edited
with a plain text editor too) because of the new boiler stuff pressure...

   and intuitively OpenOffice doesn't seem likely either.

=> to prefer emacs to OOo is a subtle way to like open source (:-).
   
   It's easy to create your own poll at the same site.
   
   We're at 11/43/10 now, by the way. It looks as if XML suits
   about 2/3 of our authors, but we have a substantial nroff
   party.
   
=> nroff is not so bad. The problem is the community which supported it
moved to Latex many years ago... And for short I-Ds direct writing is
easier/faster/etc. BTW IMHO the best tool should be so painful that
I-Ds would be very small (:-)?

Regards

Francis.Dupont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

PS: what we need is a rfc2xml. It seems there is a secret rfc2nroff...

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]