Re: [rfc-i] contributors section & tools

I just looked at RFC 8663.
Long list of Contributors. Jari appears to extract them OK.

The XML for 8663 is available in the datatracker.

I see that the RPC elected to use my magic formatting which has the whole
section presented as <artwork> to get the format correct.

Not sure whether xml2rfc v3 has special tags for contributors. If so, that
would solve the problem.

A

-----Original Message-----
From: 'Toerless Eckert' <tte@cs.fau.de> 
Sent: 15 July 2020 19:13
To: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Cc: -interest@rfc-editor.org; tools-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] contributors section & tools

Thanks, Adrian

Any example XML for which you're aware that the contributor section was
correctly parsed, then
i will just clone that formatting. I do like the idea to format with all the
same contact
info as if the contributors where authors, but thats just for emphasizing
for human readers,
not for a poor script.

Cheers
    Toerless

On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 07:04:35PM +0100, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> I believe Jari's script attempts to do this and counts Contributors in the
> author stats it generates
> 
> The script is very vulnerable to formatting errors and since the
> Contributors section is usually hand-crafted, the script often misses
people
> or documents.
> 
> Jari always welcomes fixes to the scripts. Last I looked there were lots
of
> "IF RFC=abcd THEN make this special exception"
> 
> A
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org> On Behalf Of
> Toerless Eckert
> Sent: 15 July 2020 18:41
> To: tools-discuss@ietf.org; rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
> Subject: [rfc-i] contributors section & tools
> 
> Is there any tool from e.g.: the IETF or Arkko publishing houses that
> actually deparses names
> in a contributors section and does something with that information ?
> (aka: allows recognition stats like they are done for authors) ?
> 
> I could not find anything in RFC 7749 that would allow me semantic tagging
> of contributors,
> Am i wrong ?
> 
> If not, then parsing would have to be difficult and heuristic, and i
> therefore fear the answer to my
> above question is NO ?
> 
> Wasthere not a time when we wanted to make contirbutors better
recognizeable
> ?
> 
> Thanks
>     Toerless
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

-- 
---
tte@cs.fau.de

_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest