[rfc-i] Minutes posted
paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Sat Nov 10 04:27:13 PST 2012
On Nov 9, 2012, at 9:29 PM, Andrew G. Malis <agmalis at gmail.com> wrote:
> Two comments that were missed in the minutes:
> 1. Stefan was thanked for his work on NroffEdit.
> 2. If the revisable format changes from nroff, RFC authors will need WYSIWYG editing tools at least as easy to use as NroffEdit.
Point #2 presumes that the current revisable format is nroff. We hear mixed stories from AMS on this, mostly because we hear what we want to hear. If I tell the RFC Editor that I am about to do a revision on RFC 6722 and I want the final edited edition, they will send me the XML, not the nroff. Some of us on this list know that they, in fact, probably went through an additional step of converting XML to nroff and mucked with the nroff, but to the public, XML is the visible revisable format.
If this can be made clearer in the next version of draft-rfc-format-flanagan, that would be lovely. "* Currently: XML (optional), NROFF (required)" is completely unclear and/or wrong.
More information about the rfc-interest