IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] t with indent

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Wed, 30 December 2020 05:30 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 408393A0F5E; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 21:30:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, NICE_REPLY_A=-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 (body has been altered)" header.d=gmx.net
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 4rMF0nSp5PW5; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 21:30:06 -0800 (PST)
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 CB70E3A0F4D; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 21:30:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E90B1F406F3; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 21:29:36 -0800 (PST)
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 E4C58F406F3 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 21:29:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net
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 OszZ6RKHvtqI for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 21:29:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DA02F406F0 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 21:29:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1609306189; bh=xzmGcpIOg67dmLRWuIReV+DMmYMKGaxV9RbyxcTIhfk=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=PC5sWXaEEZu0OIvNRR6Z9ssvoxLHfTV4RGalBsWAnZcPFjdB9wEUBrpuMx7gzbJjQ rzhQQoi16IMdVQf9fn7gie0Vmk/myV9C9i5LA59sD12xtnFZbhTnxWu4yC18xO8A/G chwmQsziAu7kqBV/n0Jux4TC+CPNtGTaBwxEmiN8=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([91.61.50.246]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx004 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MtOGa-1k19uN25BW-00uqui; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:29:49 +0100
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
References: <CABcZeBOvxuD0pnWrkcywcKBMsd4CuCrLB4YkmDStpwh7e-SkSA@mail.gmail.com> <6551e660-83e3-eb1b-0ac1-bce0d15bcdad@gmx.de> <BDBA9A94-8A40-4A50-B6E6-A229CB4A6DB6@tzi.org>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <750ad31e-bf48-9ef3-bb74-3d4b002b5450@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:29:48 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BDBA9A94-8A40-4A50-B6E6-A229CB4A6DB6@tzi.org>
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:6XJRNO51OQ/hIKcplUfi9BRiHcFiQ7TsCzS1VVNR4LP03GSe4mW OaUqkl/TWdix38CHBL+XDayMbbcBZHj5B9Nk79bnCz8r2fB+S/o7SZ/wGv+G31nNYs4TEzO YnBQbQXTPrqVE2E0g8l5ghqCJc3Wi6ixKDP957rys4d/lQgr1tIRVNwaivRYZJ/UvZcJ/a0 KuBCCLGqj1awAvDkKZWzA==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:RyWde3tg9UU=:9LO/hmbWWyr1jIN84jaSP/ G0kvzNXnHxlIcWmp0jtw6AS+FNqEiVqxS6t5F66C1UMSAW4QJfQ2PhMTSZlVSxi1JznS8NSVa p4RGVACDkzb+/TrrE/QTsJGoQh7QOo6At0+XadpV26BoUrpP2e7Qt4CDzZl7pogONa+9AY1nO ZoU9TnIOUHaVcfwb6H+QmTrr1hx5mr7vGPEa3sqJYX6bjkTOAcDoMiHqeFzURS9FWaNPVNokS nJL9fd1c1uiKcA+DXVJIUwZEmoTC2Y52v4u5EcUy1MQ1TDxSCeQV4KCccxrdE/bbsjMBhNRhN eaASMIkfU3SK+2DT09xp9VkggxRcEsQe1knJhG2s5Lrt5U7cNSy1JKSBjgOx2U3v77srgBFei UHG/H5MHn2GIX6w+jB3SvqsV4cvWt/efQQshuirOQ785hk8DNeLD1lwpgfYEYzekdFLFVpIuE bWfhAdFj4kcORUL3HHgNu3nHBslv7ygnlJ2UKbv2dWgQOsApf+6YDwfDk0JspDTifnXnvLsGo 6JjynE7u0RVuENt7A7Lsml1l3xnyhzsaSvDpMAyvHRfRW2dCNUR+UEcY1NXqaWdVTtLHGNcj6 2o9mp7dJnBRy/T2KphPTmOgdjKbMykZhRL94cDqzVA8y4YngfLUPuUNQzKiIt5zt37E+3eSpl sIXCXe4TFuZUZyGDhdC/cmmNus4COzbaeQDkqPra4CRBcF1qyyZGAm6lTeXDxWrhPDjC0XiPz cMM5bLn9z8/vM9XLDkggtMRIp2k+R4KV7k+OMq2lhyM14uJft1w0zyqbPYLmq4gciMK4kzJLI 7gAybn1rqrDvtz3veShRbPLmbHBFol3TcV7szRslA004IGzKya4jScUzQmGSASk9gk/5mZV5W kZ9J2/cfU7OcUtk3VJgQ==
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] t with indent
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-editor.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

Am 30.12.2020 um 00:03 schrieb Carsten Bormann:
> On 2020-12-29, at 20:39, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>>
>> The example IMHO clearly should be a <blockquote> (which will get
>> indentation), as it cites text from the IANA registry:
>
> In RFCXMLv2, the equivalent of an HTML blockquote was done using a <list style=“empty”>, i.e., no bullets.
>
> This idiom somehow continues into RFCXMLv3, with <ul empty=“true”>.
>
> There now *additionally* is a <blockquote> element, but in xml2rfc that generates a lot of chrome, so it is *not* equivalent.  (It also has “cite” and “quotedFrom”(*) attributes.)
>
> So kramdown-rfc translates a markdown blockquote into <list style=“empty”>, which is then translated into <ul empty=“true”> by xml2frc for RFCXMLv3.
>
> You can still manually enter the new RFCXMLv3 blockquotes:
>
> <blockquote>
> Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.
> </blockquote>
>
> And will get (xml2rfc TXT version):
>
>     |  Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their
>     |  level and then beat you with experience.
>
> (or an “inlay” style rendering in HTML), way more heavy than the normal blockquote style.
>
> Grüße, Carsten
> ...

For completeness: there's also <aside>, which can be used to format
indented Notes. Unfortunately, the generated TXT is very similar to the
one generated for <blockquote> - the HTML is fine.

Best regards, Julian
_______________________________________________
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