Re: [Json] Proposed agenda for London meeting

I think it will also be an xml2rfc issue or at least the RFC discussions
will gate it.

The reason for having a better RFC format in my view is so that machine
readable parts of specs such as schemas and EBNF can be embedded in a form
that allows tools to extract them and use them.

So we could have a system where you can take an RFC, press a button and
generate an implementation.

We are actually very close to that point already. I just do it in the
opposite direction, I generate the spec from the schema. But there is no
reason that we shouldn't be able to round trip.

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>wrote:

> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/89/agenda/agenda-89-json
>
> Matt and I would love to see the nomenclature/not-really-schema discussion
> continue to happen in the coming weeks, but it feels like a face-to-face
> meeting might be valuable for it as well.
>
> --Paul Hoffman
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> json@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>

-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/