[rfc-i] Number of submission formats
marc.blanchet at viagenie.ca
Fri Jan 18 10:48:13 PST 2013
Le 2013-01-18 à 13:45, John Levine a écrit :
>>> Specifically, for any given RFC there should be one canonical form
>>> which needn't be the same as for other RFCs (i.e., some will be .txt,
>>> some will be PDF, ...). And for any input to the RFC-Editor queue
>>> there should be a single canonical input form that the editors will
>>> work with (XML with whatever schema, nroff, ...).
> Heck, no. There is a canonical output format, the one to which we
> point if someone wants to know what is "the RFC."
> There are acceptable input formats. Currently there are, as I
> understand it, 2 1/2 input formats, line printer format similar to the
> current output format, xml2rfc, and maybe nroff if it uses the same
> coding the production people use.
> I don't see any reason to change that structure. The canonical format
> may change (I hope it does, to something close to xml2rfc), and the
> set of input formats may change, e.g., lose nroff, but perhaps add
> something that lets you bundle xml2rfc for the text and separate
> chunks for the pictures. But the model of one output, multiple
> inputs seems to work.
multiple inputs may work but brings less efficiency in the whole process (from initial draft to RFC publication)
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
More information about the rfc-interest