[rfc-i] draft-iab-html-rfc-02: references

Paul Hoffman paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Tue Mar 1 09:37:46 PST 2016


On 1 Mar 2016, at 9:26, Julian Reschke wrote:

> So yes, it needs to be documented.

More than that: it needs to be implemented the same way for every output 
formatter. So far, we have achieved that though the prep tool creating 
XML that the output formatters can use directly instead of having to 
apply additional checks.

> Right now I'm concerned about authoring and formatters, not the 
> preptool.

If you are concerned about the formatters, you would want them to 
receive something they could not get wrong.

> If I understand your proposal correctly you propose that the old 
> format continues to be ok, but there'll be another way of doing 
> things, that'll be output by the preptool, and that any formatter will 
> have to understand. That makes things worse (IMHO), because there are 
> now *two* ways to achieve the same thing -- you can't fix a complexity 
> problem by adding more complexity.

It feels like you have forgotten that the output formatters will be 
using the output of the preptool. If you had remembered that, your last 
sentence would not make sense.

--Paul Hoffman


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list