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

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

I agree that xml2rfc is quite clunky. My experience is that if you use
Markdown, especially with MTs templates, it's generally quite easy.

-Ekr


On Sun, Jun 26, 2022 at 9:07 AM Keith Moore <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>
> On 6/26/22 11:53, Barry Leiba wrote:
>
> Maybe
> because I-Ds are too much work, maybe also because they look too much
> like RFCs and have so many rules enforced on them these days.  I-Ds were
> not originally intended to be that much work; we've layered on more and
> more formal requirements and expectations over the years.
>
> This is an interesting point, because, no, I-Ds are not a lot of work
> and do not have rules enforced on them.
>
> The rules and the nit-checker that points many of them out are for
> when the I-D goes to the IESG, looking for approval to be published as
> an RFC.  But just to post an individual Internet draft?  Just knock up
> a text file in the approximate format, taking an existing one as an
> example, give it a name that begins "draft-moore-" and ends with
> "-00", and post it.  The rules at this stage are **very** few.
>
> Maybe part of the problem is that that's not clear, that because of
> the rules that are applied at the latter stages we have fostered a
> skewed perception of what's required just to post an initial idea.  We
> should definitely fix that, if so.
>
> Well, there's clearly some sort of disconnect here, because every I-D I've
> submitted for the past decade or more has required hours of fiddling with
> xml with arbitrary rules, and boilerplate with arcane rules, and responding
> to meaningless error messages, usually with a deadline looming, iterating
> until a miracle happens and the document is actually accepted.   I realize
> that it's not strictly necessary to write I-Ds using xml2rfc but I've been
> of the impression that the same rules are enforced either way.   So maybe
> this is a tools problem or a web site problem rather than a rules problem,
> but I think there's some sort of problem there.
>
> Keith
>
>
>
> --
> Gendispatch mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch
>