[rfc-i] [Tools-discuss] prototype xml2rfc creation wizard tool
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Wed Mar 30 09:02:44 PDT 2011
On 30.03.2011 17:40, Fred Baker wrote:
> On Mar 30, 2011, at 2:22 PM, Tony Hansen wrote:
>> One question: should the<facsimile/> and similar fields be output even if they're not filled in?
> That's really a question of the DTD; there are some (organization in the author block) that are required even if empty, and some that are required (year in the date specification) but can be inferred by the tool. What you want to do is "do no harm", and make it easy for the consumer of the file to know what options they have that they may not have used. One way to do that is to specify everything even if empty, and as a quick solution it has something to recommend it. After the fact, I'm not sure it's all that important, and I could imagine tools like XMLMind interpreting the DTD and as a result not including them when *they* store them.
<organization> isn't required anymore ((I think we changed that in 1.34).
> I personally don't mind which you do. But if it was me, I would probably specify them all just to make sure that any subtleties were finessed.
Well, absence of an element is different from it being empty. Even íf
xml2rfc may treat them the same way we shouldn't rely on that.
More information about the rfc-interest