Subject: RE: RFCs should be distributed in XML

From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 14:59:57 +0100

> > These days, when a draft moves into the RFC editor queue, the RFC
> > editor sends a request to the author to send in the xml2rfc input
> > files if they exist.
> 
> Ironically, the *very next* message in my inbox after Bill's was just 
> such a request from the RFC Editor, for draft-ietf-ltru-initial-06.
> 

But be carefull....
As far as I know (RFC-editor can and will (I suspect) correct me if I
am wrong) the RFC-Editor will not generate the FINAL RFC from the
xml source file. I am in fact not 100% sure how much of the editing
they do to the xml source file. But at some point I believe they
generate an nroff source file from the xml source file. And after
that point they still make (at least sometimes) additional changes
to the nroff file that do not get reflected in the xml source file.

So (as far as I know), you can and will not get back an xml source 
file from RFC-editor that is 100% in sync with the final RFC.
And such (in my view) is bad for future revisions (if any) cause
the author (or next WG editor) will have to manually figure
out what the changes were and manually retrofit them.

Bert

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 06:43:47 -0800

> out what the changes were and manually retrofit them.

For this particular document, I'm expecting a huge change anyway: about 
95 pages, constituting the initial contents of the RFC 3066bis registry, 
will be removed from the document before publication.

But thanks for the heads-up.  I'll be careful to watch for any 
unanticipated changes.

--
Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California, USA
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/