[rfc-i] RFC editing tools
nico at cryptonector.com
Fri Dec 7 09:40:38 PST 2012
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)
<jhildebr at cisco.com> wrote:
> On 12/7/12 6:47 AM, "Ted Lemon" <mellon at fugue.com> wrote:
>>On Dec 7, 2012, at 2:30 AM, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)
>><jhildebr at cisco.com> wrote:
>>> *All* of the tag names for the XML should come from the HTML set, and we
>>> agree. :)
>>This simply isn't possible‹HTML doesn't have all the tags we need.
> Name one, please. I am able to generate XML2RFC format from the subset of
> HTML that I'm using in the prototype.
That's easy: all the front and back matter metadata tags, like
<author>, <organization>, <reference>. And, of course, <rfc> itself.
That said, I agree that for the meat of a document (the contents, the
text) HTML is fine, and it's rather annoying that xml2rfc uses <t>
where HTML uses <p>, and so on. If I hadn't internalized it so well
by now I'd have much harsher words than just "annoying"; for new users
xml2rfc must feel like so much a result of NIH syndrome, like so much
gratuitous torture. Here it may be that the only material addition
xml2rfc has to bring to the table is <artwork>, and then only because
we like (well, I do, anyways) ASCII art.
If we're going to use HTML as the basis for the schema we might as
well stop nesting <section>s and go back to <h2>, <h3>, ... <hN>.
(Figuring out how to convert from the latter to the former in XSL took
a fair bit of effort when writing lyx2rfc!)
More information about the rfc-interest