[rfc-i] [Tools-discuss] updated Word template and tools

Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 2007-02-13 18:07, Joe Touch wrote:
>>
>> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>> Joe,
>>>
>>> I don't see the analogy with any BCPs - they are rules, whereas
>>> xml2rfc, your template, and the various nroff templates still around
>>> are just tools - very useful tools - but are they archival material?
>>
>> The tools no. The RFCs describing the tools - presumably in a
>> non-versionspecific way - yes.
>>
>>> I would ask the same question of RFC2629 if it came up today; in fact
>>> it's out of date, which sort of proves my point. I'm sure there are
>>> other
>>> RFCs that are also in this class. That's why we invented IONs, in fact.
>>
>> Who's "we", and where are IONs?
> 
> "We" is presumably the IETF community, since RFC 4693 was approved
> after a last call debate. The main culprits were Harald Alvestrand,
> Cullen Jennings and myself.
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/IESG/content/ions.html

That was agreed to as an experiment. There doesn't appear to be a
process in place for these as yet.

I'll consider participating in that track after BCP 78 is in that
series; that will convince me it exists and that it's ready for use.

Joe

>>>    Brian
>>>
>>> On 2007-02-13 16:26, Joe Touch wrote:
>>>> Although the template can continue to be updated to track boilerplate,
>>>> the description of what the template is and how it was designed should
>>>> be as stable as many other RFCs.
>>>>
>>>> I.e., to the extent that the BCP78 docs are RFCs, this should as well.
>>>> If we did have a series solely for RFC administration purposes, then
>>>> both should be moved there.
>>>>
>>>> In summary, I intend to submit this for publication as an Informational
>>>> RFC. That is the meaning behind "final".
>>>>
>>>> Joe
>>>>
>>>> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>>>> Joe,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for this.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure anything like this is ever truly 'final' though.
>>>>> It seems like the sort of updatable materal that IONs are aimed
>>>>> at.
>>>>>
>>>>>      Brian
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2007-02-12 23:54, Joe Touch wrote:
>>>>>> Hi, all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A new version of my Word template is now available; it includes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    - moved boilerplate to regular text to make it easier
>>>>>>      for authors to track the evolution of BCP 78
>>>>>>    - added Intended status: header item
>>>>>>    - added acknowledgement of use of this template
>>>>>>
>>>>>> updated ID:
>>>>>> http://www.isi.edu/touch/pubs/draft-touch-msword-template-v2.0-05.txt
>>>>>>
>>>>>> updated template:
>>>>>> http://www.isi.edu/touch/tools/2-Word-v2.0.template.dot
>>>>>> (this is always the most up-to-date one, if you just want to link it
>>>>>> in)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> perl post-processor:
>>>>>> http://www.isi.edu/touch/tools/2-Word-post-v2.0.pl
>>>>>> (same thing - always updated)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Feedback would be appreciated. This version appears to be final, and
>>>>>> will likely be submitted for publication as an RFC. Comments welcome.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Joe
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Tools-discuss mailing list
>>>>>> Tools-discuss at ietf.org
>>>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Tools-discuss mailing list
>>>> Tools-discuss at ietf.org
>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss
>>

-- 
----------------------------------------
Joe Touch
Sr. Network Engineer, USAF TSAT Space Segment

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20070214/f5c19a31/signature.bin