[rfc-i] [xml2rfc-dev] Preparing for allowing v3 submissions into the repository (was Re: Alternate artwork vocabulary and post preptool)

Robert Sparks rjsparks at nostrum.com
Thu Feb 7 12:33:17 PST 2019

On 2/7/19 2:24 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 07.02.2019 21:07, Robert Sparks wrote:
>> The change proposed in this thread (to allow the preptool to 
>> incorporate SVG from external files as artwork rather than a data 
>> URI) seems right, and important.
>> The IESG is ready to allow v3 submissions into the repository as soon 
>> as the tooling is ready. The tooling is very close. As noted in the 
>> thread, our goal is to have the submission tool accept a standalone 
>> file (rather than solve how to allow submission of multiple components.)
>> I'm asking that this change be made to the toolchain.
>> RjS
> Could you please clarify what you mean by "v3"?
> 1. The thing described in RFC 7991?
> 2. The thing described in draft-iab-rfc7991bis-01?
> 3. The vocabulary that happens to be implemented by the current 
> version of xml2rfc?

Practically, right now, I mean 3.

I do remember that we need to reconcile as implemented with what's in 
the bis draft, but that's not what this message is about.

> Best regards, Julian

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list