[rfc-i] Does the canonical RFC format need to be "readable" by developers and others?
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Fri Jul 6 06:04:24 PDT 2012
On 2012-07-06 14:41, Martin Rex wrote:
> Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 2012-07-06 01:44, Martin Rex wrote:
>>> Moving away from plain ASCII is magnitudes easier than moving away from
>>> XML, which is why ASCII is a pretty good choice in the first place.
>> If moving away from plain ASCII was "easy", it would have happened already.
> rfcmarkup, which produces one HTMLized version of ASCII TXT RFCs and IDs
> accessible under http://tools.ietf.org/html/
> did not need months of mailing list discussions to come into existence,
> and did not require I-D authors to dump their existing authoring tools.
...and it does only a subset of what we're trying to get.
Yes, you've told us numerous times that it would be easy to extend to do
more, but so far nobody has done that.
Best regards, Julian
More information about the rfc-interest