[rfc-i] RFC editing tools
Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)
jhildebr at cisco.com
Sat Dec 8 23:25:42 PST 2012
On 12/7/12 12:16 PM, "Nico Williams" <nico at cryptonector.com> wrote:
>On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Ted Lemon <mellon at fugue.com> wrote:
>> I'm not specifically advocating XML‹I'd be perfectly happy with LISP
>>sexprs. But I suspect XML is a more practical choice. I don't think
>>HTML is a practical choice.
>
>I am quite fond of saying that there's been nothing new under the sun
>in data encoding/representation since S-expressions. But there is one
>thing XML does *really* well: tools like XSLT/XPath/XQuery, ... are
>like LISP macros/functions like destructuring-bind, but on steroids,
>taken to the nth, and well thought out. This is valuable. XSLT in
>particular is.
For the XPath stuff, jQuery-style CSS selectors work really well. The
prototype's bin/rfcq script make those really easy to execute on the
command line.
>At least three of the available I-D/RFC authoring/editing solutions
>(including my lyx2rfc) depend XSLT. I would not want to lose this, so
>for me XML is it. XHTML might suffice, but not HTML -- it has to be
>XML, and all metadata needs to be available programmatically and
>unambiguously. The only exception I'd make here is for formats which
>can losslessly be converted to XML in some schema.
The prototype output is well-formed XML. I didn't declare it as XHTML in
order to track a little closer to where I think the industry is going with
HTML5. In fact, I generated the XML2RFC version of the draft from the
original HTML version with XSLT.
--
Joe Hildebrand
More information about the rfc-interest
mailing list