If we want to make the IETF approachable for all, then for me this statement from Stewart is true, and part of the problem. I'm not an engineer. I don't spend my days in code. Github is not part of my workflow. More over, as a newcomer, i think the idea of cribbing someone else's draft and using it as a basis is probably a non starter. I share Kathleen's musing, in that I wonder too what will be popular in <x> years from now. I'll take the unpopular stand that being able to write in (gasp) Word docs works perfectly for me - in fact, it's highly desirable. :)
</rathole>
Sarah
> On Jul 10, 2019, at 7:47 AM, Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> If you don't like XML, use Markdown.
>
> There is not a lot more to remember than a # to start a section level
> and four spaces for a figure.
>
> The header template is a bit strange, but you crib that from an existing draft, then you need a few minor bits of # and {} for references and you know everything you need to know for 99% of the work.
>
> - Stewart
>
> On 10/07/2019 15:11, Adrian Farrel wrote:
>> Is it really that hard?
>> Even crusty old idiots like me have worked out how to use an editor to make XML that is acceptable to XML2RFC. I doubt that I am clever or more talented than Fellows of major engineering organizations.
>> All tools (even github) require to be learned.
>> Replace tools with better tools, by all means.
>> But don’t make changes for personal preference: that way lies unending debates about whose preference is best.
>> Thanks,
>> Adrian
>> *From:*ietf <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx> *On Behalf Of *Richard Barnes
>> *Sent:* 10 July 2019 14:57
>> *To:* Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx>
>> *Cc:* Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@xxxxxx>; IETF Rinse Repeat <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
>> *Subject:* Re: Things that used to be clear (was Re: Evolving Documents (nee "Living Documents") side meeting at IETF105.)
>> I'm glad it works for you. The non-IETF-habituated new authors I've worked with have found it mystifying. Including everyone from junior engineers to Fellows of major engineering organizations.
>> As Christian says, our continued attachment to bespoke tools is a barrier to getting new work in the IETF, and thus detrimental to the long-term health of the organization.
>> --RLB
>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 9:47 AM Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx <mailto:randy@xxxxxxx>> wrote:
>> >> Tooling is just one of the problems with XML2RFC. The real issue is
>> >> that XML2RFC is completely specific to the IETF. This translate into
>> >> training ...
>> > It also has been optimized for the production of RFCs. Also note that
>> > many changes in the v3 vocab just align the language with HTML (lists
>> > and tables come to mind).
>> from an xml non-lover:
>> xml2rfc rocks! it produces the baroqe, designed by committee, internet
>> draft format from input which i can easily produce in my text editor.
>> and the support, maintenance, and responsiveness of the tools team is
>> simply stunning.
>> [ and for the poster who wished for a gooey, there is one ]
>> thank you!
>> randy
