[rfc-i] [Ietf-and-github] New Version Notification for draft-kwatsen-git-xiax-automation-00.txt

Henrik Levkowetz henrik at levkowetz.com
Tue Feb 26 09:25:28 PST 2019


Hi Joel,

On 2019-02-26 18:19, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> RFC 5377 section 4.3 calls out that code has different copyright grants 
> than other parts of the document.  It describes various examples of 
> code, and then asks the IETF Trust to specify textual marking for code 
> so that authors can be explicit and can mark things that may not be 
> obvious by the examples.
> 
> So it goes back a lot earlier than 6087.
> And as far as I know goes back to before there was any tooling support 
> for the markings.

Indeed.  And later, when there was discussion about possible code markings,
I proposed that we use the <CODE BEGINS>, <CODE ENDS> introduced by RFC 6087,
rather than inventing something new.

Regards,

	Henrik

> 
> Yours,
> Joel
> 
> On 2/26/19 11:52 AM, Kent Watsen wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> The original reason for "CODE BEGINS" etc was for licensing (to 
>>> clarify that part of the content is considered to be a "code component").
>> 
>> 
>> Perhaps and, if so, then the markers may still have a purpose.
>> 
>> That said, I only know the markers coming from 
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8407#section-3.2, which came from 
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6087#section-3.1.   As the co-chair and 
>> shepherd for these drafts, I assure you that my limited understanding 
>> for the original motivation is correct.   It's not intended to have any 
>> relationship to copyrights, though RFC6087 conflates both a module-level 
>> copyright (inside the YANG module) and markers (outside the YANG module) 
>> in Section 3.1, which we de-conflicted in RFC8407.
>> 
>> Kent
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ietf-and-github mailing list
>> Ietf-and-github at ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20190226/32fd1e3f/attachment.asc>


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list