[rfc-i] Does the canonical RFC format need to be "readable" by developers and others?
ynir at checkpoint.com
Tue Jul 10 06:39:00 PDT 2012
On Jul 10, 2012, at 3:38 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2012-07-10 14:30, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>> I think we could defer that to a phase 2. The core of this problem is
>> to have the RFC editor process XML2RFC files and not convert
>> everything to nroff.
> Hear, hear :-)
One core problem is getting drafts and RFCs into multiple output formats that work well on phones, tablets, paper, large screens, and readers. There is no doubt that XML2RFC is far more adaptable to whatever presentation formats we may want to create.
The other problem that keeps coming up is people wanting to add images, graphs and formulas to documents. XML2RFC as it currently stands is just as ill-suited for this as nroff.
More information about the rfc-interest