Re: Why the normative form of IETF Standards is ASCII

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

 



between the XML and the final output. If we could agree that the final XML was authoritative,

What, precisely, do you mean here? Do you mean that there would be NO text form of an RFC that was authoritative, or do you mean that BOTH the xml2rfc form and some text-equivalent form (say, .txt or .pdf) would be authoritative?

The XML is authoritative, the text is derived from it. This presumes that we improve xml2rfc so it produces text comparable to the stuff we have now, and has sufficient change control and regression testing that we can count on future versions of xml2rfc to produce the same output with the same input.

As I expect you know, multiple forms are quite common in other SDOs. The ITU typically publishers authoritative PDFs, but also provides Word documents for people who want to cut and paste.

R's,
John
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
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]