Re: xml2rfc improvements (was: Re: Image attachments to ASCII RFCs)

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

 



On Tue Jun 20 19:50:36 2006, John C Klensin wrote:
As a more general observation, the whole XML2RFC family of tools
seem to have been designed and optimized for producing RFCs.  To
the extent to which I have complaints personally (and I have few
-- I'm generally quite happy with it) it is because, while the
RFC Editor produces RFCs, most of us spend most of our time
producing and revising I-Ds.  It is much better now than it was
when the project got started, but, IMO, the places where it
comes up short are in tools for working collaboratively, and
developing and tracking changes, on a document that is a work in
progress rather that one at the last pre-publication stages.

I use a version control system (specifically subversion) and tools such as meld - http://meld.sf.net/ - for handling that case. What changes is meld's job using a diff between revisions, why is from the log entry.

Between them, I find them a sufficiently close fit that I'm not looking for anything better.

I specifically don't think that trying to emulate version control features in a document format is worth spending effort on.

Of course, if I could convince everyone I co-edit/co-author with to use the version control system, I'd be even happier, but it works okay even if I proxy their changes in.

Dave.
--
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave@xxxxxxxxxxxx - xmpp:dwd@xxxxxxxxxx
 - acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
 - http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade

_______________________________________________

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]