[rfc-i] Re: troff/nroff macros for RFCs and I-Ds

Carl Malamud carl at media.org
Sun Jan 30 04:37:27 PST 2005

Hi -

>   3. any specific tweaks to formatting...

It looked really good, but on the examples (what we call
<figure><artwork> using the older method), you seem to loose
your left margin.  Was that intention?

>   1. Is there any reason not to pursue this as an Informational
>      RFC via IETF channels?  If not, what AD would something like
>      this fall under? [I would prefer not to submit it as an
>      "independent" submission to the RFC Editor outside of the
>      IETF, as it would then contain an IESG Note disclaiming
>      suitability for any purpose, which is likely to put off
>      potential authors who might otherwise use it.]

This sounds like the general area.  Independent submissions don't
necessarily have such severe caveats if the iesg feels it is
somewhat relevant.  And, since developing more nroff/troff
macros sounds like pretty close to the core rfc-editor work,
an independent submission wouldn't necessarily be inappropriate.
(You could try and get a working group, but you'd probably have
to start with a "Future of CSTR54++ BOF".)



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list