[rfc-i] On backwards compatibility for v2
pkyzivat at alum.mit.edu
Tue Feb 11 08:39:00 PST 2014
On 2/11/14 11:23 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Feb 11, 2014, at 11:18 AM, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> For instance, for one document that is still in draft state, I upgraded the xml so that it would work with the v2 tool. But when I generated my new version with the new tool, and did a diff to the prior version, it showed many more differences than just the intended ones, due to formatting differences. That was distracting, so I chose to keep using the old tool for the time being.
> There's an ongoing tools discussion about the ways in which the diff tool could be better than it currently is...
OK. IMO there is no single best answer.
Sometimes the current approach, that shows every formatting difference,
is a good thing for spotting unintended consequences.
Other times I would like to suppress some things. (E.g., whitespace
changes, changes in headers that repeat on every page, changes to page
numbers in the TOC, etc.)
Maybe diff could have a selectable severity level.
More information about the rfc-interest