Re: RFC archival format, was: Re: More liberal draft formatting standards required

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

 



Douglas Otis wrote:
...
Use of xml2rfc conversions has uncovered some odd quirks. The tool does not cache bibliographic database selections. Either this works on-line, or the entire database needs to be local. Not to diminish the service offered by Carl Malamud, occasional sporadic connections to the xml.resource.org servers can be a cause of angst for authors who have
> ...

If it hurts, don't do it.

Translation: if you don't want to rely on network resources, keep a local copy. I recommend that anyway, so that the xml2rfc input file is self-contained.

Relying on external references for internet drafts is fragile anyway: that the reference automatically updates to the latest version may look handy, but may cause authors to miss important changes.

...
not obtained the entire tarred xml bibliographic database. Lately, the dependability of the xml2rfc approach has become less reliable when dealing with cryptic entries and beta TCL needed to generate I-D boilerplate language as required by nit checker.
...

The "experimental" version (http://xml.resource.org/experimental.html) is as stable as predecessor versions; the main reason it hasn't been released is that the authors (IMHO) expected more boilerplate changes to occur.

And what exactly do you mean by "cryptic entries"?

This makes one wonder whether there could be a better way. A hybrid approach might offer the similar features found in xml2rfc with the simpler the inputs supported by 'roff. This would not exclude the use of Word, but would not depend upon any of Word's content automations. Perhaps a bit of Perl could provide the pre and post processors to handle something that resembles the xml2rfc front section. While roff is not perfect, it has been more stable than other WISIWYG word processors and, when used in conjunction with separate pre/post processors, can generate the desired alternative outputs.

I think the right approach is to either help maintaining the TCL code, or to rewrite xml2rfc in a different language.

BR; Julian



_______________________________________________

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

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