Re: Things that used to be clear (was Re: Evolving Documents (nee "Living Documents") side meeting at IETF105.)

[Kathleen Moriarty <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:12 AM Adrian Farrel <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Is it really that hard?
>
> Even crusty old idiots like me have worked out how to use an editor to
> make XML that is acceptable to XML2RFC. I doubt that I am clever or more
> talented than Fellows of major engineering organizations.
>
> All tools (even github) require to be learned.
>
>
>
> Replace tools with better tools, by all means.
>
> But don’t make changes for personal preference: that way lies unending
> debates about whose preference is best.
>

Agreed, the language of the day will continue to evolve.  As soon as you
standardize on something, we are onto the next thing.  JSON was cool for it
seemed a year or two.  How long will Markdown and CBOR be preferred?

Since there's a way to use markdown and convert, the problem is solved.
Maybe tooling to make it more seamless if there is still an issue is a
better answer.

Thanks,
Kathleen


>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Adrian
>
>
>
> *From:* ietf <[e-mail]> *On Behalf Of *Richard Barnes
> *Sent:* 10 July 2019 14:57
> *To:* Randy Bush <[e-mail]>
> *Cc:* Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>; IETF Rinse Repeat <
> [e-mail]>
> *Subject:* Re: Things that used to be clear (was Re: Evolving Documents
> (nee "Living Documents") side meeting at IETF105.)
>
>
>
> I'm glad it works for you.  The non-IETF-habituated new authors I've
> worked with have found it mystifying.  Including everyone from junior
> engineers to Fellows of major engineering organizations.
>
>
>
> As Christian says, our continued attachment to bespoke tools is a barrier
> to getting new work in the IETF, and thus detrimental to the long-term
> health of the organization.
>
>
>
> --RLB
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 9:47 AM Randy Bush <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> >> Tooling is just one of the problems with XML2RFC. The real issue is
> >> that XML2RFC is completely specific to the IETF. This translate into
> >> training ...
> > It also has been optimized for the production of RFCs. Also note that
> > many changes in the v3 vocab just align the language with HTML (lists
> > and tables come to mind).
>
> from an xml non-lover:
>
> xml2rfc rocks!  it produces the baroqe, designed by committee, internet
> draft format from input which i can easily produce in my text editor.
>
> and the support, maintenance, and responsiveness of the tools team is
> simply stunning.
>
> [ and for the poster who wished for a gooey, there is one ]
>
> thank you!
>
> randy
>
>

-- 

Best regards,
Kathleen