Re: [rfc-i] [irsg] Resending: Page numbers in RFCs questions / preferences

[Benjamin Kaduk <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 03:42:52PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
> Ben,
> 
> 
> > On Oct 27, 2020, at 3:32 PM, Benjamin Kaduk <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 03:38:08PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
> >> Ben,
> >> 
> >> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 02:51:17PM -0700, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> >>>> The input XML already provides blocks.  It should be fairly reasonable for
> >>>> the tool to provide you something like "this is section X.Y, ¶5".
> >>> 
> >>> Like https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8815.html#section-3.1-5 ?
> >> 
> >> You seem to have missed the paragraph 5 symbol I added.
> >> 
> >> I regularly use the html anchor notation above. :-)
> > 
> > I am not sure which of us is confused -- the link I provided is directly to
> > the fifth paragraph of the section (the "-5" suffix effectuates that
> > functionality).  
> 
> No, I missed the distinction of the -5 vs. .5.  If so, certainly my primary use cases for such citations are covered.

Ah, happy to help.

> Is there a guide that has any other such things I may have missed?

I don't remember a specific guide; I think I have just picked up on some
things by exploring and clicking on random stuff.  (Well, and perhaps
spending way too much time on the datatracker.)  But it's possible that one
of Heather's plenary talks had a summary of new and exciting features and
I've just forgotten about it.

> >> If it wasn't for the fact that our XML is of highly variable quality
> > 
> > Indeed.  And there does not seem to be much appetite for fixing that -- I
> > had asked about even something as simple as consistent indentation for
> > nested XML elements and got a response along the lines of "if authors care,
> > they can put in the work to make the XML look pretty".  Which is
> > unsatisfying to me, but I apparently failed to make a persuasive case for
> > it.
> 
> This is a battle I'd have no stomach for.  Much like code indentation, it's a fight that only generates sore losers.  And much like code indentation, if you care - run it through your favorite indenter.  
> 
> That said, a tool that can generate such citations might still be of use if we continue further down this hole.  But I think if we have the ability to generate paragraph and section citations, we're probably covering the majority of the common use cases.

I suspect you are correct.

Thanks,

Ben
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest