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 17:09, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Jul 11, 2019, at 10:25 AM, Julian Reschke <[e-mail]
> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>> The insertion of the second one could indeed be automated, but then you
>> would have to give a hint about normative vs informative.
>
> That would actually be a really nice enhancement.   It could be the rule
> that if no reference says, it’s normative, if all references either
> don’t say or say normative, it’s normative, if all don’t say or say
> informative, it’s informative, and if some say normative and some say
> informative, it’s informative.   The idea being that some references to

If one says "normative", it's normative, no?

> the same document may be normative and some informative, and it makes
> sense to be able to signal that in the XML.  Maybe every reference
> should say, but I’m sure that would be a pain.

Lots can be done with more metadata :-).

> It would also be nice if the publication date could default to “today”
> and if the draft number could be determined automatically based on what
> is most recent…

It already does default to "today", unless I'm missing something.

Calculating the draft number *could* be done at submission time; I
wouldn't want to do it always, because then, if the last was "01", the
generated one will say "02" - even if it never gets submitted.

Best regards, Julian