[rfc-i] Proposed new RFC submission requirements

John Levine johnl at taugh.com
Thu May 24 15:10:05 PDT 2012

>However, the fact is that the original authors can insert the
>*intended* metadata and anyone else (or an algorithm) can
>only guess the intention.

What he said.  The more semantic info we have in the canonical format,
the more likely it is that the tools that manipulate it will do
what we want them to.

I suppose that if there are people who for whatever reason are utterly
unable to deal with tools that produce markup, we could have some
backup path.  But just as we do not, as far as I know, still accept
hand typed I-Ds (see, for example RFC 635), perhaps we can take another
small step into the modern era.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list