[rfc-i] transition plan for choosing alternative format for RFCs

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Mon Mar 26 07:00:29 PDT 2012


On 2012-03-26 15:46, Patrick Linskey (plinskey) wrote:
> I said:
>
>>> HOWEVER, the use of plugins to MSWord to provide improved output
>>> capabilities is well established and has been part of the
>>> workflow/ecosystem of many for at least a decade or more.  Is the
>>> addition
>>> of a plugin to Word any more/less reasonable than a completely
>> separate
>>> tool (eg. xml2rfc)??
>>
>> I'd say "yes".
>
> Well, that was a meaningless response. Didn't notice the choice in the
> sentence on first read.
>
> To be more clear, I think that a Word add-in in our tool chain is not a
> good choice. I also think that an XSLT-based processing path (instead of
> TCL-based) would be a laudable and fairly-achievable goal.

Right. It has been achieved many years ago :-)




More information about the rfc-interest mailing list