[rfc-i] Potential RFC format approach: XML
touch at isi.edu
Sat Mar 24 18:34:41 PDT 2012
On Mar 24, 2012, at 9:00 PM, "John Levine" <johnl at taugh.com> wrote:
>>> We can't be that unique in our needs that we can't use commercial tools.
>> Although I don't fully agree with this, I don't mind having that as a
>> requirement. Therefore, our choices are Word or HTML.
> There are a wide variety of XML editors, you know. Some are WYSIWYG,
> some are just emacs-style text editors with a mode to help edit the
> As a concrete example, a WYSWYG XML editor called xxe has a quite
> usable freeware version, as well as a fancier paid version, and a
> Google Code profile for editing xml2rfc. It formats the text as you
> write, like Word does.
> I'm not a fan of WYSIWYG editors, but I find xxe no worse than Word.
Not even close, and I'm speaking vs using word to write rfcs right now.
I've tried various XML editors including xxe. I find it easy to do things in wysiwyg- mode that render the XML non-compilable. It's also not possible to cut and paste structural subtrees as in outline mode in word.
Using xxe was like time travel to the early 1980s as editors go.
That's what prompted me to update the word template, fwiw.
Anything less functional and capable than that is a step backwards IMO.
More information about the rfc-interest