[rfc-i] Archival format to rfc-interest and the IAB
Andrew G. Malis
agmalis at gmail.com
Thu Feb 13 11:17:44 PST 2020
Just my 2 cents. If we ever want to have a hope of being able to rerun
archived XML v3 RFCs through the processor, all interim v3 RFCs should be
checked once the final v3 vocabulary is determined and the corresponding
tools are available. This can be done perhaps just by rerunning them and
comparing the new result against the original result. If they're the same,
then no updates are needed. If they do differ, then the archived XML should
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 2:10 PM Sarah Banks <sbanks at encrypted.net> wrote:
> Hello IAB and RFC-interest community,
> The RSOC has been following discussion of the issues encountered
> in deploying the v3 RFC format. These issues have necessitated several
> changes to the format as bugs and ambiguities are found. While we believe
> that this is necessary, we have a concern that the incremental nature of
> these changes will result in will result in RFCs published in more than one
> XML format over time, as the adjustments are made.
> The Temporary RFC Series Project Manager is currently
> investigating how many of the already-executed as well as anticipated
> changes might result in backwards-incompatible changes to the format, to
> get a better sense of scale.
> It could be that having multiple such formats in the corpus of
> RFCs will be an acceptable outcome; or, a decision could be made to
> re-publish the affected "interim format" RFCs in the final v3 format. We
> don't believe it's necessary to make that decision now, but we're sharing
> this information with the broader community for discussion.
> For the RSOC
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rfc-interest