[rfc-i] [xml2rfc] will <vspace=n> disappear
cabo at tzi.org
Mon Oct 27 09:04:11 PDT 2014
One of the cognitive problems here is that the XML is both a source and an output (archival) format.
For a source format that is used to generate specific outputs, tweaks are useful.
For an output format, maybe not so much.
I have the same problem with xml2rfc already in a different place.
All my source files of course use Unicode (Universität, —, „, «, all that).
Today, xml2rfc converts this to the necessary ASCII fallbacks for publication (Ari Keränen’s name being the only place where that didn’t work well, so far).
With XML as a publication format, I’ll need a XML to XML processor to do that.
(Maybe I don’t quite understand the future version of the “ASCII-only” approach here, though.)
Tony: Yes, “keeps” are a good way to express author intent, in particular if they come with a “badness” indication. The way you seem to be suggesting I use them is as a way to represent tweaks as well. How do I distinguish semantic (intention expressing) keeps from tweaks?
More information about the rfc-interest