[rfc-i] transition plan for choosing alternative format for RFCs
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Mon Mar 26 09:04:38 PDT 2012
On 2012-03-26 16:06, Joe Hildebrand wrote:
> On 3/26/12 4:00 PM, "Julian Reschke"<julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
>>> 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 :-)
> Note: Patrick is a newbie to the IETF, and I appreciate his being willing to
> wade into the deep end of the pool on this topic since he's got experience
> with both HTML and the Word file formats. We'll need to give him pointers
> to things that are (for old-timers) everyone-knows-x territory.
Oh, indeed. Sorry for that!
More information about the rfc-interest