Re: XML2RFC submission (was Re: ASCII art)

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

 



On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 20:31 -0500, John C Klensin wrote:
> Folks, not to be a stick-in-the-mud, but one of the things that
> has made  the RFC Editor process attractive for authors is that
> it is possible to design and use the right format for a
> particular presentation.  Sometimes that means "interesting"
> page layouts and indentations.

An extension in the XML2RFC conversion permits better control of the
formating.  

<figure title="">
  <artwork name="" type="" height="" width="" xml:space="preserve">

 ASCII artwork or fixed formatting (with XML characters escaped).
 i.e. &lt; or &gt;  Of course &quot; is needed elsewhere as well.

  </artwork>
</figure>

Is there something prohibiting the IETF from controlling the RFC2XML and
XML2RFC process?  Perhaps XML2RFC could be improved with schemas as
better guides authors using more modern (OS independent) editors.
Following the web2 trend, there could be a web based application to
further simply this process, perhaps even allowing entry of an text RFC.

Some suggested PDF or or PS.  These represent the output of the document
and not the input, meaning subsequent changes would be difficult.  At
least with XML, moving ASCII back into a document is not too cumbersome.
With a XML as an input, then including links or references within
various "spiffy" outputs would not be problematic.

As with anything, there is a learning curve. Including links and
references would be improved by having access to the source document
rather than amorphous output text that requires a display application
before it can be understood.

-Doug



_______________________________________________

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]