[rfc-i] xml2rfc issue
brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com (Brian E Carpenter) Thu, 04 February 2016 19:26 UTC
From: "brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com"
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 08:26:51 +1300
Subject: [rfc-i] xml2rfc issue
In-Reply-To: <56B30AA7.6000009@dret.net>
References: <569ECD88.6050800@dret.net> <08865843-A8BB-430A-AE6A-0F7E715DF4DF@rfc-editor.org> <569FCE6B.7060503@att.com> <56B0F8C9.3030705@dret.net> <56B24BEE.7070701@gmail.com> <56B250B9.40806@dret.net> <026c01d15ee0$3e9b5eb0$bbd21c10$@augustcellars.com> <56B298B8.2080700@dret.net> <56B3077C.6030201@tzi.org> <56B30AA7.6000009@dret.net>
Message-ID: <56B3A5FB.1080108@gmail.com>
On 04/02/2016 21:24, Erik Wilde wrote: > hello carsten. > > On 2016-02-04 00:10, Carsten Bormann wrote: >> Interesting. <eref target="http://www.tzi.org">TZI</eref> works with >> xml2rfcv2 as specified in RFC 7749 in my little kramdown-rfc test set: >> It translates into >> ... TZI [1] ... >> and a (weirdly named) section under References: >> 7.3. URIs >> [1] http://www.tzi.org >> For a while, I have been reluctantly believing that this was actually >> the intended behavior, and it is consistent with RFC 7749. > > this is what i remember. for example, https://github.com/dret/I-D/blob/master/Published/xml-patch/draft-wilde-xml-patch-10.txt > is an older draft (june 2014), and i don't know what version of xml2rfc i was using, but as you can see, it did work at that > point in time in the same way as you are describing. > >> So it seems there need to be specific circumstances to trigger the bug >> below. My test set uses symrefs for the biblio references, but it still >> "works" if I switch that off, with the little flaw that both the biblio >> references and the URI references are numbered starting from [1]. Hmm, >> kramdown-rfc generates separate normative and informative references... >> (How did you switch that off?) > > i am doing things very simply: i write the XML directly, and then i convert it via http://xml2rfc.ietf.org/. > >> $ xml2rfcv2 --version >> 2.5.0 > > http://xml2rfc.ietf.org/cgi-bin/xml2rfc-version reports 2.5.1.dev0 > >> (And, yes, I can reproduce the bug from draft-wilde-registries-01.xml. Hmm.) > > not sure if i can help with better explaining the situation. this used to work as i thought it should, and now it doesn't > anymore. i am not sure which version triggered the change in behavior, but as shown above, it did work roughly 1.5 years ago. Yet I recall it failing about 7 years ago; so it's a very data-dependent bug. Anyway: let's get the spec right in xml2rfcv3! Brian
- [rfc-i] xml2rfc issue Erik Wilde
- [rfc-i] xml2rfc issue Heather Flanagan
- [rfc-i] xml2rfc issue Tony Hansen
- [rfc-i] xml2rfc issue HANSEN, TONY L
- [rfc-i] xml2rfc issue HANSEN, TONY L
- [rfc-i] xml2rfc issue Erik Wilde
- [rfc-i] xml2rfc issue Erik Wilde
- [rfc-i] xml2rfc issue Brian E Carpenter
- [rfc-i] xml2rfc issue Erik Wilde
- [rfc-i] xml2rfc issue Jim Schaad
- [rfc-i] xml2rfc issue Erik Wilde
- [rfc-i] xml2rfc issue Brian E Carpenter
- [rfc-i] xml2rfc issue Carsten Bormann
- [rfc-i] xml2rfc issue Erik Wilde
- [rfc-i] xml2rfc issue Brian E Carpenter