[rfc-i] Digital Preservation Considerations for the RFC Series -- draft-flanagan-rfc-preservation-00.txt is posted

John Levine johnl at taugh.com
Wed Sep 10 19:16:16 PDT 2014

>I'm reviewing the draft, and wondering if the problem is that I'm
>specifying xml2rfc as the tool to preserve over a more broad "whatever
>tools are required to verify the XML source and render the publication

That's an interesting question, but the answer is along the lines of
how far down in the turtles do you want to preserve.

The xml2rfc tools are written in python.  Current versions of python
are written mostly in C.  Current C compilers are written in
themselves, but depend on an underlying operating system to handle the
files and such.  And so forth.

Assuming the W3C is making a comparable effort to preserve the specs
for XML, I would preserve the python code for xml2rfc, and the specs
for the format.  What are you using to create the PDF/A?  I expect
it's complex enough to be a challenge to reverse engineer.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list