Re: [rfc-i] Unicode in xml2rfc v3

Am 02.12.2020 um 07:57 schrieb Carsten Bormann:
>
>
>> On 2020-12-02, at 07:35, Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 2020-12-1, at 21:02, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
>>> Well, with the current toolset, you can.
>>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xml2rfc/48tS5guJqVpjGUkvPeD7K2aViis/
>>
>> thanks! Could I maybe ask that we start an FAQ or HOWTO for kramdown-rfc2629 to capture some of these not-so-obvious tricks and tips? Or add a canonical example Markdown document that uses them all?
>
> I’m long overdue with starting an I-D about kramdown-rfc2629.
> This particular trick has been recently invented though/
>
>> Also, using the {{{α}}} trick doesn't seem to work in a list. This source:
>>
>> - set {{{α}}}<sub>aimd</sub> to 1 once W<sub>est</sub> reaches W_max (#2)
>>
>> gets converted to:
>>
>> <li>set <contact fullname="α"/><sub>aimd</sub> to 1 once W<sub>est</sub> reaches W_max (#2)</li>
>>
>> and throws this error:
>>
>> draft-eggert-tcpm-rfc8312bis.xml(2402): Error: Element li has extra content: contact, at /rfc/back/section[2]/section[1]/ul/li[6]/contact
>
> Hmm, that is an xml2rfc bug.
>
> <contact/> has only been added to <section/> (block-level) and <t/>, not to <li/>, which has its own copy of the content model of <t/>.  There are a few more elements like <name/>, <blockquote/>, <dt/>, <dd/>, <xref/>, <cref/>, <tt/>, <strong/>, <em/>, <sub/>, <sup/>, <preamble/>, <postamble/>, <th/>, <td/>, <annotation/>, <refcontent/> that need this fix.

On the other hand it's not clear at all, whether *contact* information
is needed in all of these places (I do agree with <li>, and there's
already a ticket about that:
<https://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc/trac/ticket/519>, opened
seven months ago).

> ...

Best regards, Julian
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest