[rfc-i] [xml2rfc] [Tools-discuss] xml.resource.org is up again

Michael Richardson mcr+ietf at sandelman.ca
Wed May 28 08:42:39 PDT 2014


Tony Hansen <tony at att.com> wrote:
    > Some suggestions are that we use either xml2rfc.ietf.org or
    > xml.ietf.org. Another suggestion is that these should really be under
    > rfc-editor.org, as in xml2rfc.rfc-editor.org or xml.rfc-editor.org.

The tools should be under xml2rfc.ietf.org, since some of them (the online
copy of xml2rfc... etc...)  involve some amount of active computing.

The .xml files should be under xml.ietf.org, and should be widely and easily
mirrored, since they are just static files in the end.

The rfc-editor{.org} should have xml.rfc-editor.org which should have the
master copy of all reference.RFCXXXX.xml files, and those links should also
be present in the metadata returned by rfc-editor.org/doc/rfcXXXX.

    > Another suggestion is that everything should not be bundled together under
    > one domain name. For example, split up the bibliographic entities across
    > multiple domains. (I.e., RFCs could get their bibliographic information from
    > rfc-editor.org, and I-D's could get their bibliographic information from
    > ietf.org.)

Yes, canonically that should be the case, but I think that mirrors make
sense, and our tools should do URN resolution to find a copy.


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF at sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 481 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20140528/149871c1/attachment.sig>


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list