[rfc-i] Internet Draft Format

Dave Crocker dhc at dcrocker.net
Sun Mar 25 03:02:07 PDT 2012



On 3/25/2012 11:53 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>> That minor "so long as" is a non-trivial requirement.
>
> Adding a single line of text is non-trivial?

Given how many years I was unable to display xml in my browser with the desired 
formatting, apparently yes.


>> The question on Display is because I'm not remembering what the RFC
>> Editor is doing versus what the IETF tools do as "unofficial"
>> enhancements. I think the current hmtl that is provided is one of the
>> unofficial enhancements. I also think it is /not/ generated from the
>> xml2rfc but is a post-processing hack on the ascii text.
>
> That is true; and that's why it's mainly cosmetics on the plain text version,
> losing many of the things we can do when we transform directly from xml2rfc form
> to HTML.

For this initial exercise, I was only trying to capture current reality.  When 
we all agree on that baseline, we can consider improvements.  The one you cite 
is certainly an appealing example.

d/

-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list