Elwyn Davies wrote: > Seconded. > > I *have* used it for a production run and whilst it is not perfect it > makes document creation and editing significantly easier than typing > 'raw' xml even into a syntax-aware text editor. > > It is also very helpful for proof reading and commenting (spell checker > provided). > > And the standard version is free.. and supported on Windows, Linux and Mac. > > I used to use the Word template but the freedom from hassle of > generating the final documents I'm not sure what freedom this means; XML still needs to run through a script, just as Word does. > the ease of generating references Commercial software allows BIBTEX references to be imported into citation databases, so this is moot as well. > makes > xxe/xml2rfc > and support of complex numbered lists (almost impossible to achieve in > Word) I checked your three current I-Ds and five RFCs, and the most complex numbering I saw was "G1, G2, ...", "P1, P2...", and paragraphs numbered "G.1:, G.2:...". Word has been able to handle all of these since the late 1980's. Was there a more complex example I missed, or one in a pending document that hasn't been issued that you could give as an example? Joe
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf