[rfc-i] Does the canonical RFC format need to be "readable" by developers and others?
touch at isi.edu
Fri Jul 6 14:34:40 PDT 2012
On 7/6/2012 12:49 PM, John Levine wrote:
>> Constrained HTML.
> So long as there's a mechanical two-way conversion to the XML that the
> rest of us use that fully preserves the semantics in both directions,
> that's OK with me.
Why assume XML conversion?
If we're talking about a new solution, then backwards compatibility with
a source format that is NOT required by the RFC Editor should not be
expected or required.
More information about the rfc-interest