Re: On XML and $EDITORs (Re: Things that used to be clear (was ...)) "Living Documents") side meeting at IETF105.)

[Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>]

On 11.07.2019 17:27, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>
>> On Jul 11, 2019, at 17:09, Ted Lemon <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> It would also be nice if the publication date could default to “today”
>
>      <date />
>
> or in kramdown-rfc, just leave off the date: member, and kramdown-rfc will insert the date of conversion into the XML.

Yes.

"When one or more of "year", "month", or "day" are left out, the
processor will attempt to use the current system date if the attributes
that are present are consistent with that date." --
<https://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc7749.html#rfc.section.2.13.p.3>

And in V3 it is actually optional, see
<https://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc7991.html#element.front>.

>> and if the draft number could be determined automatically based on what is most recent…
>
> I think, more generally, there should be some support for the -latest convention (e.g., in idnits, or in xml2rfc that is currently spewing a warning). (...)

+1000

FWIW:

"Furthermore, it is good practice to disambiguate current editor copies
from submitted drafts (for instance, by replacing the draft number with
the string "latest")." --
<https://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc7749.html#rfc.section.2.33.3.p.4>

It's very annoying that xml2rfc complains about something the spec calls
"good practice".

 > ..

Best regards, Julian