Re: [rfc-i] [Rsoc] New proposal/New SOW comment period

[Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>]

On 31.08.2019 19:43, Jim Schaad wrote:
> So the piece of mail from Russ makes for an interesting starting point for
> discussion of what you believe this new person should be doing.

Excellent point.

> He has asked for a new feature, change bars, to be added to the v3
> vocabulary and provided an example of when this has been done in the past.
> This means that the person in charge needs to look at this feature request
> and decide what to do with it.  Except for a decision to punt, this is a
> decision that has long term effects on the RFC series.  Should this be
> allowed?  If allowed how is it presented for the different document formats?
> What is the mechanism that this is done in the vocabulary?  Does this mean
> that we should have the full set of change bar features or not?  The current
> document just has bars down the side, but does not have any insert or delete
> markers.

One could also question whether it's a good idea to have "diff"
documents like these in the first place. IMHO it's totally a disservice
to the reader.

> Is this the type of decision that this new Temp RFC Series Manager supposed
> to be making?

Hard to say until we have a concrete timeline about when v3 is properly
defined (not only implemented), and when we plan to have a v4.

Evolution-wise, I'd except v4 to be mostly extensions, plus removal of
things deprecated in v3.

With respect to the concrete example: to find out whether v3 is
sufficient, it would be good to get the production center to look at:

- things they did in NROFF because xml2rfc's output was deemed not good
enough (well, except for line break and page break control), and

- things where the authors or the production center used <artwork> for
stuff that actually is not artwork.

Best regards, Julian
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest