[rfc-i] Two issues with draft-flanagan-plaintext-00

Tim Bray tbray at textuality.com
Sun Jun 29 11:38:51 PDT 2014


​You know, I’ve been one of the louder voices in favor of more modern
publishing formats, but I have to say I think the .txt is brilliant for
diffs, and diffs are super-important.  Or am I missing something… Is there
a good example of a diff using either XML or HTML?​



On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat at alum.mit.edu>
wrote:

> On 6/28/14 6:28 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>
>> On Jun 28, 2014, at 1:08 PM, Ted Lemon <mellon at fugue.com> wrote:
>>
>>  I would like rfcdiff to operate on the XML
>>>
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>
> I don't understand how that will work.
> I can see how you can do the diff on the xml, but how will the result be
> rendered?
>
>
>  ; however, I have not heard any reports that any such thing has been
>>> attempted yet.
>>>
>>
>> The v3 format is not yet done.
>>
>>  I expect it will be hard.
>>>
>>
>> For two XML RFCs, it will actually be easier than on text. For one new
>> and one older, it will probably be done by converting the old text into the
>> new text format, then diffing those two.
>>
>> --Paul Hoffman
>> _______________________________________________
>> rfc-interest mailing list
>> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>



-- 
- Tim Bray (If you’d like to send me a private message, see
https://keybase.io/timbray)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20140629/bad3274b/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list