[Cellar] WIP FFV1 upgrade from xml2rfc v2 to v3

Dave Rice <dave@dericed.com> Thu, 08 November 2018 15:07 UTC

Return-Path: <dave@dericed.com>
X-Original-To: cellar@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cellar@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA1D3128CE4 for <cellar@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 07:07:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.87
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.87 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=1.989, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AHZjWR07UMvY for <cellar@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 07:07:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from server172-3.web-hosting.com (server172-3.web-hosting.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17BE8128CF2 for <cellar@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 07:07:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] (port=50200 helo=[]) by server172.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from <dave@dericed.com>) id 1gKluD-000YW1-1j for cellar@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Nov 2018 10:07:39 -0500
From: Dave Rice <dave@dericed.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_AFB9DF4F-0EAB-4510-8DB9-3D7EA95AEDC6"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Message-Id: <C6C0874A-9332-4EA5-AB3E-70336A60B5C7@dericed.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2018 10:07:33 -0500
To: Cellar list <cellar@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server172.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - dericed.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server172.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: dave@dericed.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server172.web-hosting.com: dave@dericed.com
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cellar/bG76QisfZlNtNnmJSIViRfejIM8>
Subject: [Cellar] WIP FFV1 upgrade from xml2rfc v2 to v3
X-BeenThere: cellar@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Codec Encoding for LossLess Archiving and Realtime transmission <cellar.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cellar>, <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cellar/>
List-Post: <mailto:cellar@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cellar>, <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:07:42 -0000

Hi all,

I drafted a pull request at https://github.com/FFmpeg/FFV1/pull/135 <https://github.com/FFmpeg/FFV1/pull/135> which upgrades from the use of xml2rfc version 2 (with mmark and xml2rfc) to xml2rfc version 3. The pull request addresses some changes to accommodate this while preserving the semantics as some markdown features we used are no longer supported in the new xml2rfc. Version 3 also supports svg images for representation of mathematical formula. Thus the Makefile requires some new dependencies in pdfcrop and pdf2svg in order to produce embeddable svg images.

A representation of the HTML RFC output is available at https://htmlpreview.github.io/?https://gist.githubusercontent.com/dericed/5ce9c949eeec9042a4ac5e2b222f1cc0/raw/b315b8d3f5c4b06ecf656fc1fb7e9ad9bd6fd88c/draft-ietf-cellar-ffv1-06.html <https://htmlpreview.github.io/?https://gist.githubusercontent.com/dericed/5ce9c949eeec9042a4ac5e2b222f1cc0/raw/b315b8d3f5c4b06ecf656fc1fb7e9ad9bd6fd88c/draft-ietf-cellar-ffv1-06.html>. I haven’t seen rfc2xml version 3 much used in IETF yet though so am uncertain of how this impacts or will impact the document management process.

Comments welcome.

Dave Rice