Re: [netmod] CODE BEGINS ENDS for examples ?

Hi Balazs,

> Hello Kent,
> First <CODE BEGIN> <CODE END> is very handy and easier to use then xmllint.
> Also some people (not me) are writing RFCs without XML. SO if it acceptable to you, the RFC editor to whoever I will use <CODE...> for the examples. Is that acceptable?

Rarely do people need to extract examples from drafts.  Those wishing to copy/paste a snippet will likely do so via the HTML version that has its own (and better) way of framing examples.  Those wishing to programmatically process/validate the contents of the drafts (e.g., shepherd, RFC Editor, etc.) prefer working off the source XML.

> Folding:
> Rfcfold folds the line at a fixed 69 character length. This produces some not so nice results:
> Rfcfold:
>     <inline-schema>
>       <modules-state xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-li\
> brary">
>         <module>
> Manual folding:
>     <inline-schema>
>       <modules-state \
>           xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-library">
>         <module>
> The manual folding can keep a nice tabulation and fold the line at a word or element boundary. I know such editorial niceties are very hard to program in a script; but this is one reason to do manual folding.

Agreed, the artwork-folding draft says this as well.

> I used rfcfold to unfold the acme-router-modules example and I don’t notice anything strange.

I remind my comment. I originally thought a couple space characters were missing (e.g., “foo\” should be “foo \”) but scanning again, I don’t see any issues now.

Thanks,
Kent

> Regards Balazs
>  
> From: Kent Watsen <kent@watsen.net <mailto:kent@watsen.net>> 
> Sent: 2020. március 21., szombat 0:01
> To: Balázs Lengyel <balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com <mailto:balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com>>
> Cc: netmod@ietf.org <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [netmod] CODE BEGINS ENDS for examples ?
>  
> Hi Balazs,
>  
> As I understand it, the <CODE BEGIN> <CODE END> blocks are not appropriate for examples. 
>  
> Examples are easily extracted from XML via `xmllint` with the “—xpath” parameter, after which the `rfcfold` script can be run.  Strongly recommend setting the “name” attribute on the <sourcecode> or <artwork> element in the XML draft.  It’s good to see that you want to do it this way, as I noticed you hand-folded the examples and I’m pretty sure I spotted what looked like might result in an undesirable unfolding artifact...
>  
> FWIW, https://pypi.org/project/xiax <https://pypi.org/project/xiax> attempts to do all this, but I suspended that effort getting distracted with other things...
>  
> Kent // contributor
>  
>  
> 
> 
> On Mar 20, 2020, at 1:02 PM, Balázs Lengyel <balazs.lengyel=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org <mailto:balazs.lengyel=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote:
>  
> Hello,
> Is it allowed/recommended to use <CODE BEGINS> <CODE ENDS> around examples. In my case it would be examples of XML and JSON instance data. I would find it rather useful.
>  
> As a second step if someone could combine rfcstrip with artwork-unfolding that would be even better.
> Regards Balazs
>  
> -- 
> Balazs Lengyel                    Senior Specialist                       Ericsson Hungary Ltd. 
> Mobile: +36-70-330-7909              email: Balazs.Lengyel@ericsson.com <mailto:Balazs.Lengyel@ericsson.com>
>  
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>
>  
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>