[rfc-i] Proposed new RFC submission requirements
stpeter at stpeter.im
Thu May 24 11:18:55 PDT 2012
On 5/24/12 12:10 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> Are other folks on this list happy with the proposal to require
> xml2rfc as mandatory for the input format for RFC publishing?
Nit: xml2rfc is a tool. The format is a particular flavor of XML defined
by RFC 2629.
> would apply to all the streams (Independent, IRTF, and IAB), not just
> IETF documents.
> My personal preference would be to make text the input format, with
> the expectation that the RFC Editor would continue to add the
> necessary markup (possibly starting from XML, if it is submitted) and
> produce the different formats. I am particularly concerned about
> making input to the RFC series harder fro the Independent Stream.
1. What percentage of published RFCs are IETF, IRTF, IAB, and Independent?
2. Can't we use tools to produce the input format needed by the RFC
Editor? Right now you can author your I-D in XML, Word, or text. All of
those have tools to convert the document into what the RFC Editor
requires (you could consider idnits as a tool for the text format). I
don't see that model changing, even if the input format changes (leading
to changes in the particular tools used).
More information about the rfc-interest