[rfc-i] Comments on draft-hildebrand-html-rfc-2012-07-07 and draft-hoffman-rfcformat-canon-others-03

"Martin J. Dürst" duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Mon Jul 30 18:48:17 PDT 2012

On 2012/07/31 6:25, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) wrote:
> On 7/30/12 2:06 PM, "Tim Bray"<tbray at textuality.com>  wrote:

>> 3.2.11
>> - I'd recommend requiring<p>  inside of<li>. E.g.
>> <li>
>>   <p>My first point.</p>
>> </li>
>> <li>
>>   <p>My second point, which introduces complexification.</p>
>>   <p>HTML does the paragraphs nicely and this is really useful.</p>
>> </li>
> I'm fine with that.  It also cleans up the table of contents question.

I'm in agreement with most of what Tim said (except the "much hated" for 
XML2RFC), but I think requiring <p> inside <li> comes close to the 
current problem with <t>s in xml2rfc. It may be okay if this is done as 
a fixup, but not if it's required from the authors.

>> - Also,<pre><code>  works for code blocks, producing the effect you¹d
>> probably like.
> I'll experiment.

I never attached a specific semantics to <pre><code>, I always thought 
that <pre> was the multiple-line equivalent of <code>.

>> - I suggest forbidding CDATA sections
> I like that.  Will add to the syntax rules.

Very good idea!

Regards,   Martin.

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list