[rfc-i] [xml2rfc] use of sourcecode type
John R Levine
johnl at taugh.com
Tue Jul 21 14:00:41 PDT 2020
In article <a4c96c4f-72da-e8b6-5a31-b1617bf518fb at alum.mit.edu> you write:
>I agree that we should have some agreed upon way to do this.
>Perhaps a "+xyz" suffix, with some agreed up xyz values.
Sure, we can keep a list of conventionally used tags.
>A problem I have with both name and type is that they are invisible in
>the human readable formats. They provide semantic information that may
>be of interest to a reader. Perhaps they could be available in html via
We could do that but it doesn't seem like a very good idea, since there's no popups
in the text or PDF versions. If the semantics of a code sample are important, the surrounding
text should say something about it.
>> (Ha, this doesn’t even have “cddl” in it; I’m not sure how this is updated and whether
>there shouldn’t really be an IANA registry for these.)
This is a local convention with the IETF that goes in the RFC style
guide. IANA registries are for things that interoperate on the global
More information about the rfc-interest