IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] line wrapping in XML

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Sun, 01 November 2020 05:21 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A88A93A0E72; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 22:21:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.65
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.65 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ci5joccDFcpW; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 22:21:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A61153A0A65; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 22:21:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA389F40709; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 22:21:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECDF6F40709 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 22:21:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vy5sZBhz1GpL for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 22:21:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB8A1F40704 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 22:21:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcc60.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.204.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CP4Ch0fDmzycr; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 06:21:36 +0100 (CET)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <5857A5A1-5334-43AA-80B7-8C448FD79274@mnot.net>
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2020 06:21:35 +0100
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 625900895.717489-571c04c91156e70ef1ee02429a8b67cd
Message-Id: <B7180DCF-99F9-4E2D-B5A8-B61A743E2505@tzi.org>
References: <ac2a7cfd-d51c-5803-21dc-4fefa5ecf235@nthpermutation.com> <F75DF553-AD3E-47E1-AD95-319D28806A11@fugue.com> <4489975b-1e7c-e869-217e-9ebae3651056@nthpermutation.com> <086c01d6aead$ca98e000$5fcaa000$@olddog.co.uk> <8024C105-0E02-43A5-A27C-6A6A397E2C62@mnot.net> <849CF568-BCAC-4A25-8AB9-104F99F11935@tzi.org> <5857A5A1-5334-43AA-80B7-8C448FD79274@mnot.net>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] line wrapping in XML
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: RFC Interest <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

On 2020-11-01, at 03:21, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 1 Nov 2020, at 7:41 am, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
>> 
>> The obvious fix is to normalize both sides to be compared and do a diff on the normalized versions.
>> 
>> An imperfect normalizer such as tidy may be good enough for this.
>> (Assuming that there also will be some proofreading and not just diff checking.)
> 
> I don't think that will work; if we use Tidy pre-submission, it's going to introduce errors that have to be manually corrected at some point. if we use Tidy to create a version of the XML to facilitate comparison, it's of little utility, because the RPC will very likely break lines at different places (since they do it by hand, AIUI).

What I was trying to say was that the comparison operation (and that only) should involve normalization of both inputs to be compared.  You don’t use the normalization outputs for anything else.

Grüße, Carsten

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email