Well, we do have self-documenting xml templates that can be mashed at
not sure how well they are called out in introductory material though.
(This self-documenting template approach is quite common, e.g. IEEExplore has
(This self-documenting template approach is quite common, e.g. IEEExplore has
etc.)
Lloyd Wood lloyd.wood@xxxxxxxxxxx http://about.me/lloydwood
On Friday, December 11, 2015, 05:31, John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Folks,
I'm delighted that Alexey managed to get past the various
barriers our boilerplate and posting tool requirements set up
and hope he is now all set, but I'd like to make a suggestion
for that future in line with our claims that we are trying to be
welcoming to newcomers.
The most obvious way to figure out the requirements for and
prepare a new I-D is not to navigate a serious of RFCs that lay
out the rules but to take a recent or relevant RFC or I-D and
try to copy the relevant formats, boilerplate, and other
material from it. It turns out that, if one does not already
understand the rules, that isn't as obvious as it appears,
leading the author to get frustrated with the submission process
and various expressions of frustration on this list (few of
which are really helpful).
By contrast, simply picking up the would-be draft, mashing the
front and back matter into the appropriate form, and sending it
back to the author as a sample and accompanying it with a
friendly note takes very little time (pushing the document name,
title, author, and abstract information into XML2RFC and then
compiling it took about 15 minutes and I'm sure there are folks
around with more talent and better tools who could do it more
quickly).
I trust I am not the only one who thinks that is a better way to
spend 15 minutes than reading and participating in a long thread
about appropriateness or pointing the author to a string of
references that are a lot more likely to useful once the sense
of beating one's head against the wall dissipates.
best,
john