Re: [Gendispatch] Updating the IETF Discussion List Charter (was: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-eggert-bcp45bis-02.txt)

[Keith Moore <[e-mail]>]

On 6/26/22 17:12, Eric Rescorla wrote:

>     I would phrase it  a little differently.   If you use a working
>     template using a preparation form you are comfortable with, it
>     works pretty well.  Yes, there are some hoops to jump through. 
>     For example, we need the copyright grant.
>
> I think this is generally accurate.
>
> Having written a number of drafts with xml2rfc and with 
> kramdown->xml2rfc my experience is that xml2rfc has a number of 
> mystery failure modes which are hard to diagnose. It's a lot easier to 
> get into those states editing the xml directly because kramdown 
> generally generates correct XML. However, if you do manage to get into 
> such a state with kramdown it can be very hard to figure out what's 
> going on!

Is there a way to skip xml2rfc entirely?  IMO that's the biggest part of 
the problem.   I can accept the utility of XML for an RFC that needs to 
be maintained for a long time, but I'm not at all sure it's worth the 
trouble for a -00 Internet-Draft.   Maybe the right time to move to XML 
is when an author or WG is ready to submit to IESG.

Keith