[rfc-i] Who uses Word, was Proposed new RFC submission requirements
touch at isi.edu
Sun May 27 15:29:02 PDT 2012
On May 27, 2012, at 11:38 AM, "John R Levine" <johnl at taugh.com> wrote:
>> I maintain the tools. You can also search IDs and RFCs for the phrase "This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot." I've asked authors to keep that in so we can track them (though absence of the phrase doesn't mean they're not using the template).
> Ah, that makes it easy, at least if you're not limited to what point-and-click systems provide.
> I grepped for that string, and found it in eight documents starting at RFC 5282, or slightly under 0.5% of the last two thousand RFCs.
That string is voluntary. The rfc editor removes it unless you ask to keep it.
> It's hard to see a "requirement" to cripple the RFC format to support such a little used and semantically deficient editing tool.
A requirement is a modern text editor. This is the most widely used one in the world afaict.
You didn't even know it was updated and currently supported. That may be because we run sessions to train authors how to use xml2rfc. This tool needs no such training, but thus doesn't receive the same level of publicity.
Check the drafts collection for current usage.
More information about the rfc-interest