[rfc-i] Proposed new RFC submission requirements
jhildebr at cisco.com
Fri May 25 23:30:18 PDT 2012
On 5/26/12 12:16 AM, "Joe Touch" <touch at isi.edu> wrote:
>> Can you give a couple of reasons why you think this is "impossible"?
> Not all author formats keep the containment structure you expect. If they
> don't, it cannot be extracted to be provided as an input format.
Disagree. In my whiteboard thinking this afternoon, the algorithm seemed
pretty straightforward. You hoist each root portion of the doc that
shouldn't be at the root up to be a child of the section with the next lower
> E.g., Word doesn't use that structure.
You post-process the output of Word anyway. Whoever writes the
post-processing tool is going to have to write a few lines of code.
> I could add it for heading sections
> (it's easy to generate from nested navigation tags), but cannot generate it
> for lists or other sections - there's no way to differentiate between a set of
> paragraphs that are not related and ones that are, so there's no way to group
> them in a container.
I assume the sections are separated by a header, which has a depth
associated with it? Everything between headers is in the same section.
> Again, except for editing, why does this matter? I have not seen a requirement
> that drives the need for containment labels.
I've given two.
Ironically, I started out more-or-less agreeing with you, and you've talked
me out of it.
More information about the rfc-interest