[rfc-i] Proposed new RFC submission requirements

["Martin J. Dürst"]

On 2012/05/25 2:01, Tim Bray wrote:
> I think the xml2rfc format is irritating and diverges from common
> document-markup practice in several jarring ways. I also think it's Good
> Enough, and a long history of “really minor” document-redesign efforts
> turning into extended painfests leads me to think we should just stay with
> it.

I agree that a trickle of minor changes is really painful. But I'd 
personally *strongly* prefer if we could fix the major, well-known 
irritations (starting with section headings in attributes) together with 
the other fixes that we will need anyway (alternative names/addresses,...).

Regards,   Martin.