[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.



   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list