Re: Errata Processing Stats/Queue?

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

 



Hi Michael,

On 2019-08-09 17:27, Michael Richardson wrote:
> 
> Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>     > On 2019-08-09 00:35, Randy Bush wrote:
>     >>> ** I checked Google, DuckDuckGo, Bing and Yahoo for rfc1234. tools.ietf.org
>     >>> came first each time.
>     >>
>     >> i checked my fingers, and tools is where thry go
> 
>     > And to be clear, I'll be perfectly happy to work at deploying this on
>     > tools, but I'm not assuming it's going to happen without putting a
>     > number of hours into integrating the code from the inline errata
>     > display project for use
>     > there.  I expect to look at that after I'm back from vacation, and can
>     > find  some free time.
> 
> From what I can see the rfc-editor.org HTML-ized version seems to be
> almost identical to that from tools.  (On my screen the font is slightly
> smaller, but that might be a local thing)

That's because they are using the Python library I extracted from the
original htmlization code: https://pypi.org/project/rfc2html/

> What if we put a redirect from tools.ietf.org/html/rfcXXXX to
> rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfcXXXX.html?

That would remove my ability to continue to tweak the tools copy, which I
still do.  A new feature request popped up as recently as during IETF 105,
and I expect to address it soonish.  So no, I'm not up for that.

> The DT should probably point RFC documents to rfc-editor.org, rather than
> tools.ietf.org.   For Internet-Drafts, it seems like we ought to bring the
> HTML rendering into DT.

It's already there, but has a somewhat different look, e.g.:
  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-lemon-homenet-babel-security-latest
(That copy also uses the htmlization module mentioned above.)

There's also a work item to make it look closer to what's on tools:
  https://svn.tools.ietf.org/svn/tools/ietfdb/trunk/PLAN
(Look for "* Polish the htmlization pages ...")

> A reason why the tools.ietf.org copy of the
> RFC (and Internet draft) gets a higher SEO is because it's the one that
> is easiest to link to a particular section.

Ack, but there are others too.  And efforts to spread the goodness.


	Henrik

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


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

  Powered by Linux