[rfc-i] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-hoffman-xml2rfc-18.txt

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Tue May 26 23:11:33 PDT 2015

On 2015-05-27 08:00, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2015-05-26 23:27, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>  > ...
>  > - A change in the design of relative references. In earlier drafts,
> relative references were done as additional attributes in <xref>; in the
> new draft, <xref> acts as it does in v2, and there is a new <relref>
> element for relative references. This was done to make it easier for
> authors to understand how the XML they create will be processed. Please
> read <eref> and <relref> and <xref> for a complete description,
> including examples of how the HTML for each might be rendered.
>  > ...
> FWIW, I strongly disagree with this change. I don't believe it helps
> implementers, and it also makes things harder for authors.
> ...

After reading further, I see that I missed additional attributes that 
weren't mentioned in the introduction.

So apparently:

> The frequent idiom of
>     See Section x of [RFCyyyy]
> previously was
>     See <xref section="x" format="of" target="RFCyyyy"/>
> now becomes:
>     See <relref section="x" target="RFCyyyy"/> of <xref target="RFCyyyy"/>

you can use

       See <relref section="x" sectionFormat="of" target="RFCyyyy"/>

while in the previous draft you'd have used:

       See <xref section="x" sectionFormat="of" target="RFCyyyy"/>

So <xref> was simplified, but <relref> was added which has exactly the 
same complexity as <xref> with respect to crossreferencing <references>. 
(It also lost two sectionFormat values, but that's a different story.)

For authors this means that when they make their <xref> more specific, 
they need to switch to a different element.

For implementers of tools this means that they have two distinct 
elements that overlap in functionality.

I still have no clue how this is better than what we had before.

Best regards, Julian

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list