> I'm not sure how to address the problem with legacy RFCs. I'll bet we
> could find volunteers to generate XML equivalents from the existing plain
> text documents. (We would need an XML tag to indicate which of the plain
> text or XML documents is considered authoritative.)
actually, carl malamud and brad burdick wrote a script back in 99 that
had a 20% success rate on the legacy rfcs. the (unofficial) xml versions
of those rfcs is available online.
steven connor did some work for me after that to produce xml versions of
the remaining rfcs which excluded the middle (i.e., just the front
matter and references sections got translated).
so, it's not as much work as you'd think, but still far more work than
i'd like...
/mtr
