>> I have no idea why we are doing this. > Because people have insisted on it in the past (they wanted pdf of the > htmlized documents from before the rfcxml era).
Sure! But we don’t have to do this separately any more, for RFC 8650+ (November 2019). >> This needs to stop and the broken PDFs discarded. > > I would like to make exactly this change. In addition to the review confusion > you mention, there are potential security issues with running the > transformation and the tradeoffs managing the resulting documents to > consider. I think we have agreement in the IESG, at least, to stop producing > these as well, but am looking/asking for an artifact saying so. You mean RSWG should step in? > There is a parallel discussion at creating pdf out of ppt* for slides at > meetings instead of asking people to make their own pdf and supply it. That is a bit different, as there are many ppt interpreters out there, *and* you can easily generate PDF that some browsers choke on, so this is way more complicated to get right^W functional. With RFCs in PDF form, we have canonical input (XML) and can get canonical output from our own tool (*). Grüße, Carsten (*) well, modulo breaking changes like [1]; but support for faithfully regenerating presentation forms of pre-breaking-change RFCs could be a parameter for xml2rfc if that is even wanted at all. [1]: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfc-markdown/sJhKqGSnSyG85JcV_gXKvgT_uII/ -- rswg mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
