IETF Logo Mail Archive

[rfc-i] XInclude usage

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@mozilla.com> Wed, 04 August 2021 17:51 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 D34613A0DF2; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 10:51:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, 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 MYAOOt8Zd6zl; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 10:51:13 -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 D899E3A0DF3; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 10:51:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D692AF40715; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 10:50:45 -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 C4EC0F40715 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 10:50:44 -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 G06qZ9mQiUSm for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 10:50:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd2f.google.com (mail-io1-xd2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2f]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93F4FF406DA for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 10:50:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd2f.google.com with SMTP id s184so3414737ios.2 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 04 Aug 2021 10:51:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mozilla.com; s=google; h=to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=OQR9psz+YjRD3XxFRTBJID2RcV/KdmELr+iotnfw2BY=; b=Dn/c+NM4jYdlaGf1jZkW/NnYKxCO24EaGxalVA0w42UzcIXMTUaUNwpQIaAL9ht80b 3NpawrbuywoGnPCJS1MejoLH4PERhKClDFBNMZlzF0NODTDG+4ATummB4sHT7kc73McX oyJKjGaKfNT8fnFk19cbbRRDWi+UXS4KDkoZg=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=OQR9psz+YjRD3XxFRTBJID2RcV/KdmELr+iotnfw2BY=; b=I/91w7BujhTpdkPR9Vj1P5kZDCD8cdsqaHxThl5+vqSAjDQOzSgSPoY/Bs8NRA4f3M KPdREdI/wq0QW8+TYp2W4xnDuwU1zE06VHfDPxkpzuVHcrK5wvtK/AcFyPzpk7lpfLrr EmmGlJh6OGxNTEdduhuicJt+OJ3JO2Wl4LLzXRc0MGfiBkqy8/7dalg5oJwtinK0G3zc F53FnOIsTPBzXnMgN7GBHNMjjIaSTNKgf1+9hh1R1brwCir6hscg1kyue5GdCpmqsI+e uv5WXmBOUpqVwL2ceanM1ATtD30xe7ylC0KyaNJ0I4KBwQfljOkY8WuRpbq0HrkSi3Np 3Y0A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531AQ9foWgVcatCVHtJHtbEaardVPzXk+U56VmIQ6PN5zUzbRIaF Soxa+4Q8Tonh/4haPqhbOeXbDw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzfl1oaQluCXYdpH3qqiHHpCY2/FvL7IapZ2TyGJtycZ+or3yj7e6EmfnlCrvPZw87HczXzOg==
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:7012:: with SMTP id l18mr453783ioc.44.1628099467936; Wed, 04 Aug 2021 10:51:07 -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 g9sm1498192ilj.70.2021.08.04.10.51.06 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 04 Aug 2021 10:51:07 -0700 (PDT)
To: RFC Interest <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@mozilla.com>
Message-ID: <8e3b0d82-fb22-4c99-924a-1889b4045343@mozilla.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2021 11:51:04 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.12.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: [rfc-i] XInclude usage
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="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

Back in 2017, Julian Reschke asked [1] that we clarify the scope of
XInclude [2] usage, to wit:

###

1. It should be clarified how much of XInclude needs to be supported.
I'm mentioning this because RFC7991 says that includes can not happen
where no elements are allowed, but XInclude allows inclusion of plain
text as well.

2. Is support of the xpointer attribute required? If so, do we have any
guidance how this will work when the document from which to include uses
xml2rfc format, and the pointer relies on the id-ness of an attribute?

###

We discussed this recently [3] within the RFC XML and Style Guide Change
Management Team. Our understanding is that x:include is used primarily
or perhaps exclusively to pull in reference files structured as XML. In
order to keep things as simple as possible, my suggestion to the team
and to this list is as follows:

a. Limit the usage of XInclude to XML only (parse="xml"), not arbitrary
text (parse="text")

b. Don't support fallback [4]

c. Don't support XPointer [5]

I'm curious what others think.

Peter

[1] https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/18 see
also https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/128
[2] https://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xinclude-20061115/
[3] https://codimd.ietf.org/cmt-20210726
[4] https://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xinclude-20061115/#fallback
[5] https://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-xptr-framework-20030325/

_______________________________________________
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