[rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others"

John Levine johnl at taugh.com
Wed Jun 20 10:37:00 PDT 2012

>Indeed, I am expecting that there will be additional tools for
>converting the RFC in to several different formats.  I am not decided on
>whether those conversions should happen from the source files or the
>canonical file.  I'm thinking the former would be more flexible?

For this to work, the source and the canonical files have to be the
same.  To put it in the current context, if the canonical file is
xml2rfc, we'll have to add some formatting hint directives to the
xml2rfc language that permit the tweaks currently done in nroff, so it
can directly generate a satisfactory text version.  I don't see that
as a big issue.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list