[rfc-i] comments on "Format FAQ"

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Thu Feb 27 23:18:26 PST 2014

On 2014-02-27 17:56, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On Feb 27, 2014, at 7:52 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
>> Well, we could publish the HTML/PDF/whatever versions, and keep the XML for ourselves :-) (And yes, that's not what I said before)
> This is a stunningly bad idea, so I hope the smiley was to indicate that it was not serious.

I believe it's a good idea.

> If we make a mistake in the canonical RFC, we have to make the public effort to fix it with a new RFC. That is the way to build trust in the system.

I wasn't talking (anymore) about canonical RFCs.

But we can automatically check whether the XML that we have is "correct" 
(by running it through the formatter and comparing the result with the 
published plain text). If this is the case, what would be the reason 
*not* to make an HTML version of that spec available?

Best regards, Julian

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list