[rfc-i] New version of the v2 and v3 examples draft

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Wed Jan 21 03:05:26 PST 2015


On 2015-01-21 11:24, Miek Gieben wrote:
> [ Quoting <paul.hoffman at vpnc.org> in "[rfc-i] New version of the v2 and
> v..." ]
>> Greetings again. We have submitted draft-hoffman-rfcexamples-01.txt,
>> which now uses an automated tool to generate the conversion from v2 to
>> v3 documents. We still have a long way to go, including more
>> challenging parts of the v2 document, and adding a section on v3-only
>> examples.
>>
>> We would love to hear more comments on these examples, and what you
>> would find useful in this draft.
>
> In the v3 draft it lists <seriesInfo> twice:
>
> <front><seriesInfo name='Internet-Draft' value='draft-example-of-xml-00'/>
> <seriesInfo name='std' value=''/>
>
> Is that correct?

No.

> I personally prefer docName that is used in v2 to 'value' that is used
> here.

The goal is to unify document information (previously spread over many 
attributes on the root element).

> Would it also be worth splitting off the version, ala version="00" ?

Why?

Best regards, Julian


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list