On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 20:31 -0500, John C Klensin wrote: > Folks, not to be a stick-in-the-mud, but one of the things that > has made the RFC Editor process attractive for authors is that > it is possible to design and use the right format for a > particular presentation. Sometimes that means "interesting" > page layouts and indentations.
An extension in the XML2RFC conversion permits better control of the formating. <figure title=""> <artwork name="" type="" height="" width="" xml:space="preserve"> ASCII artwork or fixed formatting (with XML characters escaped). i.e. < or > Of course " is needed elsewhere as well. </artwork> </figure> Is there something prohibiting the IETF from controlling the RFC2XML and XML2RFC process? Perhaps XML2RFC could be improved with schemas as better guides authors using more modern (OS independent) editors. Following the web2 trend, there could be a web based application to further simply this process, perhaps even allowing entry of an text RFC. Some suggested PDF or or PS. These represent the output of the document and not the input, meaning subsequent changes would be difficult. At least with XML, moving ASCII back into a document is not too cumbersome. With a XML as an input, then including links or references within various "spiffy" outputs would not be problematic. As with anything, there is a learning curve. Including links and references would be improved by having access to the source document rather than amorphous output text that requires a display application before it can be understood. -Doug _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
