IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] deprecating relref

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@mozilla.com> Fri, 09 April 2021 19:39 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 57DCE3A0839; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:39:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.451
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.451 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=mozilla.com
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 ZBFlYeg-BViu; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:38:57 -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 87C643A0825; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:38:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8459EF407AA; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:38:47 -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 916E2F407AA for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:38:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mozilla.com
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 p4XtEN3tkp71 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:38:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-il1-x131.google.com (mail-il1-x131.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::131]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FCDCF407A3 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:38:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-il1-x131.google.com with SMTP id t14so5654718ilu.3 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Fri, 09 Apr 2021 12:38:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mozilla.com; s=google; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=aw50Sjhc6u13rmcJDiaWAM1k8A3qANE2KqjGhClcWoE=; b=IpBg9mOxywdUl1nE43nE2O5+9QjvkTXd1LxqqTZCrjl66Tk/6O9L9yU6yO9AFNHEwR 71Bg90tOsaBe1jg2Hi19pZUIV7q7c44TkXrVAvms5NfffXyTotkFlIbgQkWFKEJDeaFT D4hYWGfkS86A/SbKXiAXyfsIZ8Vbn92DHXmI4=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=aw50Sjhc6u13rmcJDiaWAM1k8A3qANE2KqjGhClcWoE=; b=tAVIjWHXdF7minjndzK26XDz62N3UfVbLyeBEi7AsuMaQuSKtiphGfcsAIjqIPTg6t 79+kpDaTwPAIqmLdUtxhCbNPBFPxGlsyiuRIkTsY3BWDX8WxndNzeyogPPNoWVgwP9bS EIMtdcxM8c4uf2OWpySLBV8Ed6szH2mG57hbH1AYVTyFSgwEoeIi96JvOu/L5DOKXxYs ypqxt9IEurt0Z3X8ynu48ZwHKZ1qayALIGpFTNcwtsrWfapy1v3Z50l1exJnK+hp6F6h 8mim5gnpIbpqGoWnZkIuiLuyicErWHXFM5kVe6KHua4TVgB7T8A7TUcg4g3TGH6JCW6t k6eQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5335+gXMcBMhwz94KP8VrdPfT+HErfxhR16ue1rghjRBtL1Ey8Hm OnC96HhaDCiQ7vqCoQjpqAhGBQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyewsGUdOeDjA9dYo1eW5pRsYNFUf1imQw2nO6PZpmS07HtIfL3LaSN1Q9GUcihMUJLPvaYdg==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:eb4:: with SMTP id u20mr13371270ilj.182.1617997132129; Fri, 09 Apr 2021 12:38:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dragon.local (c-73-78-113-156.hsd1.co.comcast.net. [73.78.113.156]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l7sm1564112iln.45.2021.04.09.12.38.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 09 Apr 2021 12:38:51 -0700 (PDT)
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
References: <060157d4-68a0-9729-cf0e-9eaa38ce45d8@mozilla.com> <F9234029-134F-4423-8C6A-13A904236A98@tzi.org> <253cc10d-d355-e641-90eb-8bc0c0455486@gmx.de> <50A73B95-837E-42FB-86E9-3F3E4F22BF6E@tzi.org> <2ab812ce-37ec-12a0-c489-c51c8a5033f3@gmx.de>
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@mozilla.com>
Message-ID: <a4efb47e-5647-06c7-9014-9b71f0062b66@mozilla.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2021 13:38:50 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <2ab812ce-37ec-12a0-c489-c51c8a5033f3@gmx.de>
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] deprecating relref
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>
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 4/9/21 2:22 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Am 09.04.2021 um 10:11 schrieb Carsten Bormann:
>>
>>> On 2021-04-09, at 09:17, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 42726 sectionFormat=“of"
>>>>     1 sectionFormat=“parens”
>>>>
>>>> The value for sectionFormat=“of” is inflated as this is the default
>>>> value, I think I'm only seeing 2215 actual section references in
>>>> total, so it should really be 1487.
>>>
>>> Inserting the "sectionFormat" default when indeed no section is
>>> referenced IMHO is a bug in the preptool.
>>
>> Curious: How do you think this should be implemented?
>> Should the dependency of the presence of @sectionFormat on the
>> presence of @section be hand-coded, or is there a way to do this in a
>> schema-driven way?
>> (As you can see, my Relax-NG is getting a bit rusty.
>> This could easily be done in CDDL, but that doesn’t support XML.)
>> ...
> 
> FWIW, a simple fix for *this* case would be not to give @sectionFormat a
> default in the grammar. The author really does not care where the
> defaulting originates from, as long as it happens.

+1

Peter
_______________________________________________
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