[rfc-i] Number of submission formats

Nico Williams nico at cryptonector.com
Fri Jan 18 16:50:01 PST 2013

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman at vpnc.org> wrote:
> On Jan 18, 2013, at 1:53 PM, Yoav Nir <ynir at checkpoint.com> wrote:
>> Currently, Internet Drafts look very similar to RFCs. I think we'll want to keep that similarity.
> Who is "we" here? There are four streams for RFCs, and you are probably making the assumption that "we" are the IETF Stream.
> Yes, this could be a political football. No, it shouldn't be.

It would be if the RFC-Editor were to abandon xml2rfc _and_ nroff as
Submission and Revisable formats.  As long as at least one of those is
kept[*] then we should be OK, even if a new more preferred Submission
format is added.

Significant changes can be made to the Canonical format could be made
without that causing any strife.

[*]  xml2rfc can output nroff, after all, though I don't know if the
new version can -- if not then yeah, that'd be a problem.

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list