IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] [Rsoc] RFCs with page numbers (pretty please) ?

Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Mon, 02 November 2020 16:17 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 16D743A0D3D; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 08:17:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.697
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.697 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.247, 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=nostrum.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 GxBOOJKVzzUy; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 08:17:35 -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 6056D3A0DA6; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 08:17:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 069A3F406F7; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 08:17:16 -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 7F621F40708 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 08:17:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=nostrum.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 k994Fp2w6ZEW for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 08:17:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCEFDF406F7 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 08:17:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from unescapeable.local ([47.186.30.41]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPSA id 0A2GHH36051372 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 2 Nov 2020 10:17:17 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1604333838; bh=sI9leJnWSGHubnFOddpTH0p8AFYBbTvrnC3w48/vGho=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=NVHLsmAbmof9qhMjtHV8xcix3TxYwon26Z7tGPExUfj7uTrh6aB4yRH/wq2LFQRsY Jq9nnFdtg1yqnDD1CacFFxKqEY0ySm/8SxB6gGCfW+9QQXn4HqR9GTiF2akMv4FwP8 9QEFE957t1ac+MVOpqVOQeKbSuwM8OSdQlTkGbLo=
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host [47.186.30.41] claimed to be unescapeable.local
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com>, rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
References: <20201026181442.GA2438@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <20201028164053.GB12700@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <263C265C19B24BA97AF48934@PSB> <225062D7-C061-4543-8665-53A4F4831510@isc.org> <20201029005519.GT39170@kduck.mit.edu> <A05242FC-C38C-474F-A2AC-412329CA5C52@isc.org> <CAKq15ve-kAFZWH_f7=1XXC5PfxvO-sAzppB1fVTyqUufLftkVg@mail.gmail.com> <D2DB703DBF2A44A19B8F80DD@PSB> <CAKq15vdFVkG6_grNtqUqq-yDwj9QQcHJFZB5+RB-8fdxQXhFSw@mail.gmail.com> <fa36e919-b1a0-5b3c-9b42-54c6fdaadfb@iecc.com> <e8554ea2-1849-279f-733d-5798de8817b9@gmail.com> <26d1ff54-777f-884b-e35-d91e9fe59662@iecc.com> <00a1fc15-7559-96c6-7cd7-3ae5afd62237@gmail.com> <a34f219b-7c76-4b48-4844-5af3cd4f344@iecc.com> <be8dce95-2b4c-52c8-7eda-8a9b127a6dd4@gmail.com> <cdc14c1-54c9-5273-584c-ddb656912952@iecc.com> <5F9FDB7E.1080805@btconnect.com> <ae44e31b-964a-7901-4883-72abb0dbb8d3@gmx.de> <5F9FF8EA.9020809@btconnect.com> <bfa63584-1f49-1370-65d0-a217dcc4dbc5@gmx.de>
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <e530ccdc-6587-13dd-df51-29fc0c0b2fcd@nostrum.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 10:17:17 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <bfa63584-1f49-1370-65d0-a217dcc4dbc5@gmx.de>
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] [Rsoc] RFCs with page numbers (pretty please) ?
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-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

It's worth noting that this has been a fundamental point of disagreement 
between people involved in the v3 effort (and is often so in any world 
where you are adding big new things).

For the v3 transition, I'm still more on the fence that it's too soon to 
break people's toolchains just because we can. At some point, when 
there's not such a mix of historic text files that have to be processed 
along with the new things (which may or may not be in v3 format while 
they are internet drafts), then sure - we can say "Get with the times". 
But I don't think those times are here yet.

RjS

On 11/2/20 6:37 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>
> I do understand that both would interfere with extraction code that has
> been written for plain text, but that should not be needed/used anymore
> in the v3 xml world anyway. 
_______________________________________________
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