Since the preferred submission formats are XML or nroff, I see no reason that the HTML version could not be generated from the XML.
The problem seems to be that the RFC editor insists on using the XML to generate nroff and then makes all edits to the nroff, this is then used to generate the teletype version and a PDF of the teletype version.
The net effect appears to be that there is no HTML version available, even if the authors exclusively used HTML for the production process.
Hence, what I consider to be entirely justified anger on this point.
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Phillip,
I don't want to enter a discussion about the merits of PDF/A over HTML at this time. However, I do agree with you that it would be nice if you could submit HTML. If its true that its currently prohibited to look at it or subimt it, then that is something that could be fixed. I can take it up with the IESG. Or does someone see a reason why this should be prohibited (as long as you also submit ASCII)?
Jari
--
--
New Website: http://hallambaker.com/
View Quantum of Stupid podcasts, Tuesday and Thursday each week, http://quantumofstupid.com/
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf