[rfc-i] Internet Draft Format
johnl at taugh.com
Sat Mar 24 18:08:53 PDT 2012
>And I'm taking the trouble to walk through this to make the point that
>agreeing on "IETF canonical HTML" is going to be a big long subtle
>argument, and Im not sure its worth having.
I don't see the advantage of IETF canonical HTML over xml2rfc. Any
modern browser can render xml2rfc directly so long as it points to a
suitable stylesheet. Unlike subset HTML, xml2rfc is already defined,
and already supported by a variety of production software, including
xml2rfc itself, rendering programs such as saxon, using an XSLT style
sheet, and editors such as xxe.
If you want HTML, or plain text, or just about any other display
format, the tools already exist. I routinely read drafts on my Kindle
using off the shelf tools that turn XML into HTML and the HTML into
More information about the rfc-interest