Re: [rfc-i] SVG/A specification.

[Phillip Hallam-Baker <[e-mail]>]

On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 1:01 AM Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> On 24.01.2020 21:24, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> > ...
> >
> > That was a typo, the tool currently suppresses id, class and style. I
> > meant to delete id from that list and deleted style instead.
> >
> > The id is not needed for SVG-Tiny and the easiest way to avoid
> > duplication was to delete 'em.
> > ...
>
> It might be nice if text could link into SVG content. Of course that
> might require rewriting IDs when SVGs get inlined.


I don't see this as being very practical for RFCs unless people either want
to write an entirely new editor tool chain or grapple with really low level
XML. As far as I am concerned, my editing formats are .docx, .md and .svg.
If I have to open an XML2RFC it is a problem.

Where this could be really useful is for Internet Drafts if people start
using my commentary tool.

The commentary tool takes a copy of a document and allows people to comment
on specific paragraphs as shared annotations. Each comment then has a
process associated with it which may involve creation of an issue, merger
into an issue, etc.

Basically it is what folk are trying with GITHub but on steroids.

It did work about five years back but will need some comprehensive
re-engineering, which is only going to be practical after I finish the Mesh
3.0 release because I will build the new version on the Mesh. This work has
been delayed somewhat by the untimely death of one of my collaborators.

The prior art for this goes back to 1994 when Mallery and Hurwitz developed
the first incarnation for Al Gore's Open Meeting on the Web.


The IETF version will be public of course. But the paid enterprise version
will be end-to-end secure meaning that the comments are secure even if the
cloud service is compromised. It is the system I originally designed the
Mesh to secure.