[rfc-i] Adding line breaks to v3 [from xml2rfc]
dev+ietf at seantek.com
Mon Jun 30 23:38:13 PDT 2014
On 6/30/2014 11:08 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Jul 1, 2014, at 2:03 AM, Sean Leonard <dev+ietf at seantek.com> wrote:
>> I have not reviewed the code firsthand. However, if this is an /implementation error/, it seems to my mind to be an acceptable workaround in the v2 grammar to say
>> and then correct xml2rfc's implementation accordingly, without modifying the grammar.
> Hm. Can you give us a clear example _in an existing RFC_ of the use case you're trying to address?
First, if you are asking for an example from an RFC generated from
xml2rfc, you are asking a loaded question. If xml2rfc "cannot" output
line breaks as line breaks, you will never find an example, because the
examples that I would be able to find would be a) doctored after being
generated from xml2rfc, or b) "incorrect" (e.g., produced using
<artwork> or some such).
Second, if you are asking for "things that are items separated by
newlines, not paragraph separators", I submit:
RFC 5750 (in particular sec. 4.3)
RFC 2560 (in particular Appendix C)
RFC 2585 (in particular Section 4)
Those examples look like they clearly (enough) could not have been
generated from xml2rfc <artwork> or some such...most likely because
xml2rfc was not likely involved.
> Because whether or not your use case is something that makes sense, the above example is definitely not the right way to solve it
What is the "right way" to do anything? The right way is the way that
works. This is technology. Technology is not intrinsically imbued with
morality. As the output is US-ASCII text to submit to the RFC Editor,
any method is "right" (that is, it is a method that works) provided that
it outputs the US-ASCII text correctly.
What are we trying to solve? Adding line breaks qua line breaks (not
paragraphs, not list items) to xml2rfc, such that the text output has CRLF.
More information about the rfc-interest