[rfc-i] Notes on "submission format"
paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Fri Sep 21 15:09:30 PDT 2012
On Sep 21, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Dave Crocker <dhc at dcrocker.net> wrote:
>> Submission format = the format submitted to the RFC Editor by
>> * might not be the same as the canonical formats (though it would
>> make the workflow somewhat simpler for the RFC Editor if it
>> * will be converted to another format for further processing and
>> publication if necessary
>> * Currently: .txt (required), XML (optional), NROFF (optional)
>> "Authors" do not submit to the RFC Editor: stream managers do.
> Strictly speaking, reference to the actor doing the submission is not needed; as demonstrated here, it's even distracting.
> So, neutral language would work better, such as:
> = the format submitted to the RFC Editor for publication
I prefer to keep the "stream manager" in because some people in the earlier discussion conflated two different ideas: "the format I turn in Internet Drafts in my intended stream" and "the format the stream manager would turn in to the RFC Editor". It is plausible that if the submission format was X in the future, Stream Y might accept Internet Drafts in format X and Z, but would covert Z to X when they are ready to become RFCs.
More information about the rfc-interest