[rfc-i] Who uses Word, was Proposed new RFC submission requirements

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Tue Jun 5 02:44:01 PDT 2012


On 2012-06-05 11:29, Martin Rex wrote:
> Julian Reschke wrote:
>>>
>>> Section renumbering by the RFC Editor should be easily and completely
>>> avoidable by some minor planning ahead, and this would save the
>>> RFC Editor even more work.
>>
>> If section numbers aren't generated than you force reviewers and
>> production center to check. Even if you *do* get them all right it's
>> simply a big waste of time.
>
> That is an illusion.  There are often more references to sections
> in other documents, and that can not be automatically generated either.

Depends on whether you happen to have the target document in a version 
that allows computing the section number.

> Automatically generated section references are only "correct with
> respect to the maintained meta-data" (=syntax).  Whether the reference
> is sensical (=semantic) is unrelated to that.  When the RFC Editor
> checks the semantics, checking the syntactical correctness
> comes at close to zero cost.

I'm not worried about syntactical correctness but about references 
pointing to the wrong section. This is not easily checked at all.

Best regards, Julian




More information about the rfc-interest mailing list