[rfc-i] On backwards compatibility for v2

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Mon Feb 10 12:34:17 PST 2014

On 2014-02-10 21:16, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
> On 2/10/14 1:29 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 2014-02-10 18:03, Dave Crocker wrote:
>>> On 2/10/2014 8:11 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>>>> - There will be good v2-to-v3 conversion tools for when an author
>>>> wants to change versions.
>>> So all of the existing corpus of xml2rfc files would have to be
>>> converted, and all of the existing base of user environments would have
>>> to be upgraded?
>>> Really?
>> I still believe that we can get to a reasonable v3 without having to
>> break existing (valid) documents.
> Most of the problems I have had in converting v1 documents to v2 is that
> the v1 documents *aren't* valid. Nevertheless they have processed
> without complaint. But the v2 processor barfs on them in ways that are
> often hard (for me) to figure out.
> (I'm not an xml guy, and don't have any xml tools, or expertise in using
> them.)

Yes. That was a problem with the original xml2rfc tool. Hopefully XML 
related problems will be gone due to v2 being more strict when we get to 

Best regards, Julian

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list