Re: [Rfc-markdown] [xml2rfc-dev] [xml2rfc] <br> is back, was: New xml2rfc release: v2.32.0

Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com> Fri, 18 October 2019 18:12 UTC

Return-Path: <henrik@levkowetz.com>
X-Original-To: rfc-markdown@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rfc-markdown@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDEB01208D3; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 11:12:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 LWmMwXeea6W6; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 11:12:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:1890:126c::1:2a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6822A12084E; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 11:12:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from h-202-242.a357.priv.bahnhof.se ([158.174.202.242]:51876 helo=tannat.localdomain) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <henrik@levkowetz.com>) id 1iLWk3-0005U1-80; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 11:12:47 -0700
To: Sandy Ginoza <sginoza@amsl.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
References: <E1iGMu9-00055y-Ui@durif.tools.ietf.org> <A3513970-EEB0-4DBD-9E6F-A87EBFAF886D@att.com> <de4feaff-8f71-cd38-545c-2d848749251b@levkowetz.com> <f00a671a-6fe4-f5ae-2582-0b78ffa1c256@gmx.de> <1f18382c-d830-b887-f5d3-3f376ae4fdd7@gmx.de> <B15F7AF0-F5A0-401A-9F6E-F7E0E466B6A7@amsl.com> <f4f1b7ba-127a-fbfa-531b-eeff03814281@gmx.de> <71bc8d39-d06c-d900-cc8e-04a48218d75f@gmail.com> <0905DADC-E9D5-47A7-B610-F8A62686D2BD@att.com> <07DBAE10-D1FA-45C4-B7A2-321B265CA302@amsl.com> <694c9244-98ae-1e64-39ef-8756d48b36ef@gmx.de> <860c663b-744f-a033-cc50-96088bb1b33c@gmx.de> <04DCBCE3-2C8C-4B03-9081-EF2B7A5C6087@tzi.org> <b096e29c-02a0-e009-621e-c1eca4712226@levkowetz.com> <4321EEBF-92C2-4405-81BD-899C0FCAC762@tzi.org> <5593c2d9-0bb4-93e9-f5d0-babf194340bf@levkowetz.com> <6BF7D165-EA48-44C1-9153-3F011058561F@tzi.org> <7088451e-745b-a31b-88fb-bce9cb48696a@levkowetz.com> <efb58534-8112-2303-1967-536daae9ff51@gmx.de> <34FFD9FB-7D0A-4BEE-9BAD-AFBD7F883CE6@amsl.com>
Cc: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, "rfc-markdown@ietf.org" <rfc-markdown@ietf.org>, "xml2rfc@ietf.org" <xml2rfc@ietf.org>, "xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org" <xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org>
From: Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>
Message-ID: <b43d1d27-b193-795b-c3c3-7b652039fdd3@levkowetz.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2019 20:12:39 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <34FFD9FB-7D0A-4BEE-9BAD-AFBD7F883CE6@amsl.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="RAIca14oSEC3PUA2kAoiJFNN2VVIMvDWH"
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 158.174.202.242
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org, xml2rfc@ietf.org, rfc-markdown@ietf.org, cabo@tzi.org, julian.reschke@gmx.de, sginoza@amsl.com
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org)
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfc-markdown/7limS0AFVgt51nvUVjX42MP2OPM>
Subject: Re: [Rfc-markdown] [xml2rfc-dev] [xml2rfc] <br> is back, was: New xml2rfc release: v2.32.0
X-BeenThere: rfc-markdown@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "rfc-markdown is a discussion list for people writing I-Ds and RFCs in Markdown and the authors of the tools used for that." <rfc-markdown.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rfc-markdown>, <mailto:rfc-markdown-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfc-markdown/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-markdown@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-markdown-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-markdown>, <mailto:rfc-markdown-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2019 18:12:52 -0000

Hi Sandy,

One question, below:

On 2019-10-18 19:33, Sandy Ginoza wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> 
>> On Oct 18, 2019, at 9:41 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>; wrote:
>> 
>> On 18.10.2019 18:05, Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 2019-10-18 17:49, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>>>> On Oct 18, 2019, at 16:54, Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>; wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'd be more than happy to move to <br/> if we could make that useful for
>>>>> the RPC.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I think most people who voiced an viewpoint on that was for making it
>>>>> generally available, but when I proposed how to do that, it seemed to
>>>>> run into opposition again.
>>>> 
>>>> There were some questions about line-breaking in titles in general
>>>> (whether <br/> or U+2028).
>>>> 
>>>> I think that there is wide consensus about using <br/> in favor of
>>>> U+2028.
>>>> 
>>>> The fact that unlike the former, the latter is not visible in the
>>>> schemas makes U+2028 a great way to cheat around the consensus. We
>>>> should not do that.
>>>> 
>>>> As in the question about restricting Unicode character sets, I
>>>> believe that — as long as the vocabulary has a meaning — the schema
>>>> (mechanism) is not the place to make restrictions based on beauty,
>>>> style etc. (policy). So I would prefer to have <br/> in the places in
>>>> the schema where it has well-defined semantics. We can figure out
>>>> later whether this is always, only exceptionally, or never good
>>>> style.
>>> 
>>> I agree with this.  So again, I propose to permit <br> as a child element
>>> of these elements, where I think the semantics of a <br> would be well-
>>> defined:
>>> 
>>>    blockquote
>>>    dd
>>>    dt
>>>    em
>>>    li
>>>    name
>>>    strong
>>>    t
>>>    td
>>>    th
>>>    title
>>>    tt
>>> 
>>> Should <sub> and <sup> be in that list?  If we compare with the places where
>>> for instance <bcp14> is permitted, the answer would be 'yes'; but I'm not
>>> sure it's the right thing to do.
>>> ...
>> 
>> For <title>, I will continue to ask about the use case (line break
>> opportunity vs required line break vs title & subtitle), as this affects
>> what would happen if it occurs in a <reference>, or if there's an <xref>
>> with format="title”.
> 
> I don’t think we'll need <br> in titles; it's sufficient to have wj,
> nbsp, and nbhy.
> 
> If we come across examples where <br> would be useful in titles, we
> can revisit this discussion at that time. However, please note that
> if this case arises, it means publication of the document will be
> delayed until xml2rfc is updated.

So, how would you handle the first of my two examples in an earlier message
in this thread:  The title of my implementation notes draft, which requires
more than one line both in text, html and pdf rendering:

                     Implementation notes for RFC7991,
                    "The 'xml2rfc' Version 3 Vocabulary"


Regards,

	Henrik