On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 03:56:37PM -0800, Dave Crocker wrote: > >There's no need to copy IETFdom Assembled on this, but I'm curious what > >toolchain you're using and what limitations you've encountered. > > My impression is that there are now a number of entirely competent xml > editing systems. I happen to use oXygen. Oxygen looks like an interesting tool, but I wasn't able to readily see that it applies stylesheets to XML to produce printable/readable documents. For example, can I go from a docbook document to cmaera-ready postscript/pdf using oxygen? Or xml2rfc -> txt? If so, your argument is better than I thought; if not, I think that's a sign that we're not ready to move. Yet. I don't think editing systems by themselves are a reason to go to an XML format. Again, I think that making the RFC content and metadata available to both machines & humans is facilitated by an XML format. [snip] > the reason xml is interesting is that it makes editing easier, not just > display. XML does not interest me for that reason. -- Ted Faber http://www.isi.edu/~faber PGP: http://www.isi.edu/~faber/pubkeys.asc Unexpected attachment on this mail? See http://www.isi.edu/~faber/FAQ.html#SIG
Attachment:
pgpd9uijGsPah.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf