[rfc-i] Proposed new RFC submission requirements

Joe Touch touch at isi.edu
Sat May 26 08:35:02 PDT 2012



On May 26, 2012, at 2:20 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:

> On 2012-05-26 07:47, Joe Touch wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> The key issue is "what is the required metadata".
>> 
>> If it's minimal, it should be easy for most author systems to support:
>>    metadata:
>>    - title
>>    - authors
>>    - date
>>    - RFC number
>>    - RFC category and status
>>    internal "jump" points:
>>    - headings
>>    - figure/table/example labels
>>    - references
>> 
>> I'd really like to see what that is beyond the list I've shown here. I can see a good reason for metadata (supports document identification/location) and jump points (supports navigation based on "landmarks").
>> 
>> If it requires denoting the full document structure, that's hard to impossible, and not clear why that would/should be a requirement.
>> 
>> Joe
> 
> - metadata of referenced documents; at least to the level that it's clear what is referenced in the case of IETF/W3C/... documents

Except for editing, why? This can be a hugely cumbersome requirement. If we provide urls, those might be marked/linked, which ought to be sufficient for navigation. There is no standard for all doc metadata, so this won't necessarily help automatic cross linking.

> - for code like ABNF: type information

Again, why? The heading that marks it, sure, but why any different from fig/table/example?

Joe


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list