[rfc-i] v3imp #8 Fragment tagging on sourcecode

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Sat Jan 24 00:28:02 PST 2015

On 2015-01-23 19:53, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
> On 1/23/15 1:39 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> On Jan 23, 2015, at 10:09 AM, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>>> Different strokes for different folks.
>> That's the problem. Sean is asking for a one-size-fits-all approach,
>> without suggesting actual examples of a proposed solution.
>>> This *can* work.
>> By "work", I think of "is the solution understandable to a typical
>> Internet Draft author", and here things fall apart. It is possible to
>> mark artwork as a fragment; it may not be possible to sanely say what
>> it is a fragment of. Many RFCs have multiple ABNF modules or ASN.1
>> modules, so there would have to be some way to say "this is a fragment
>> of that module" *and* say "and the whole goes in this particular order".
>>> It would work much better if you could automatically extract the
>>> collection of fragments when you want to process it.
>> Fully agree. If we can come up with a way to help that automation
>> while not confusing document authors, this seems worthwhile. However,
>> complexity seems to be a negative here.
> As I suggested earlier, the simplest thing I can think of here would be
> specify that if multiple artwork elements have the same name attribute,
> then the expectation is that they should be concatenated when extracted.
> Then, as long as you specify the same type for all the elements with the
> same name, a verifier for that type can process it.
> If you have a number of independent ABNF modules, then just give them
> different names.

+1. And it's possible in v2 already.

Best regards, Julian

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list