Re: [netmod] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-artwork-folding-09: (with COMMENT)

[Kent Watsen <[e-mail]>]

Hi Roman,

Thanks for your review.  I'll prepare an update accounting for your (and Adam's) comments shortly. 

First, I have a couple questions:


> (1) Section 1.  To make this document more enduring, Ib
> the capabilities of xml2rfc  (i.e., no line wrapping is done) to a version
> number.

Do you mean, e.g., s/ The `xml2rfc` utility / The `xml2rfc` utility, at least up until the time of this document's publication, / ???

[BTW, I just noticed that `xml2rfc` needs a reference...I'll point it to https://pypi.org/project/xml2rfc <https://pypi.org/project/xml2rfc>]


> (2) Section 2. Is it worth saying that in addition to the primary target being
> <sourcecode> and <artwork> (xml2rfc tags), it is also anything authors
> currently put between b
> using xml tooling for rendering the draft)?

I think that the word "primarily" already provides the flexibility to use it in other contexts.  That said, I don't know what other `xml2rfc` context exists currently, or do you a future version of the `xml2rfc` specification or, perhaps, a `foo2rfc` specification?  In either case, could you provide a snippet of what you'd like to see?



Thanks again,
Kent