[rfc-i] RFC editing tools
stefan at aaa-sec.com
Wed Dec 5 06:11:34 PST 2012
I disagree on the stylesheets. Stylesheets makes it very easy to access
the content in multiple rendering formats based on one source format.
And for authoring, I have to admit that I have not tested every XML
authoring tool on the market. I use Oxygen and totally hooked on it.
Oxygen has an Authoring mode that allows me to edit XML content, almost as
if I was writing in the rendered result document, IF there is a stylesheet
that goes with the schema.
Editing in authoring mode is in my mind hugely more effective than editing
On 12/5/12 2:25 PM, "Ted Lemon" <mellon at fugue.com> wrote:
>On Dec 5, 2012, at 4:57 AM, Stefan Santesson <stefan at aaa-sec.com> wrote:
>> If this was my call, here is what I think I would have as the final
>> Extend the current xml2rfc shema to capture all information
>>necessary to become the one and only source format, from which you can
>>render all publishing formats (text, html, pdf)
>> Develop XML Stylesheets that can support advanced user's XML editing
>>as well as handle rendering to text, html and pdf).
>> Develop a web tool, and publish the code as Open-Source, that offers
>>basic editing of RFCs in a simple and user friendly fashion, producing
>>source formatted data.
>> Retire all use of Nroff
>> Reverse engineer all published RFCs into the new source format.
>> Encourage the market and volunteers to create good collaborative
>>tools for editing RFC:s using the new source format, based on the
>This looks very much like my own internal laundry list for RFC
>formatting. The only thing I'd change about this is that I'm very
>skeptical of the efficacy of xml style sheets, and would abstract that
>out to "tools". If the tools happen to be style sheets, great, but I
>don't care if they are. I'd be just as happy to have a tool that
>translated the canonical form to troff for typesetting, if that produced
More information about the rfc-interest