[rfc-i] Proposed new RFC submission requirements

"Martin J. Dürst" duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Fri May 25 06:37:42 PDT 2012


On 2012/05/25 3:10, 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? This would apply to all the streams (Independent, IRTF, and IAB), not just IETF documents.

I think mandatory would still be a bit tough, but 'preferred' would be 
the right direction.

> 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

Well, if I were the RFC Editor, or the IETF/ISOC/whatnot function that 
had to keep RFC Editor costs down, I'd definitely go for something 
marked-up, rather than text, as (preferred/required) input.

Regards,   Martin.

> (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.
>
> --Paul Hoffman
>
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list