IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rfc-markdown] [Ext] [Tools-discuss] New xml2rfc release: v3.16.0

Marc Petit-Huguenin <marc@petit-huguenin.org> Thu, 19 January 2023 17:28 UTC

Return-Path: <marc@petit-huguenin.org>
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 16F0BC14CEE4; Thu, 19 Jan 2023 09:28:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_FAIL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id k0kL3DWfcqVo; Thu, 19 Jan 2023 09:28:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from implementers.org (implementers.org [92.243.22.217]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55E11C14CF0D; Thu, 19 Jan 2023 09:28:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPV6:2601:204:e37f:a6af:d250:99ff:fedf:93cf] (unknown [IPv6:2601:204:e37f:a6af:d250:99ff:fedf:93cf]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-384) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "Marc Petit-Huguenin", Issuer "implementers.org" (verified OK)) by implementers.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 107BAAE232; Thu, 19 Jan 2023 18:28:15 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <e462d4d3-f121-1fe0-993f-04141fcb614f@petit-huguenin.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2023 09:28:14 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
Cc: "xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org" <xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org>, "xml2rfc@ietf.org" <xml2rfc@ietf.org>, tools-discuss <tools-discuss@ietf.org>, "rfc-markdown@ietf.org" <rfc-markdown@ietf.org>
References: <CAD2=Z87EMetcpv66YY_b2+X1-yFy4cTpKMjPoJL=cH99c7P_Uw@mail.gmail.com> <9d719176-a4eb-7cce-e706-10325700531c@petit-huguenin.org> <4925CBA6-6CF4-40F7-9CF5-E55D2F9CD438@icann.org>
From: Marc Petit-Huguenin <marc@petit-huguenin.org>
In-Reply-To: <4925CBA6-6CF4-40F7-9CF5-E55D2F9CD438@icann.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------AN0NhNq4XF0mNdFt0qQpIVsN"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfc-markdown/AgbgtNxiVLhiIO8XLPW-zYjvzg8>
Subject: Re: [Rfc-markdown] [Ext] [Tools-discuss] New xml2rfc release: v3.16.0
X-BeenThere: rfc-markdown@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Thu, 19 Jan 2023 17:28:23 -0000

Hi Paul,

Responding in the order I received answer.

On 1/19/23 08:12, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> 
> On Jan 19, 2023, at 7:41 AM, Marc Petit-Huguenin <marc@petit-huguenin.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 1/18/23 14:09, Kesara Rathnayake wrote:
>>> See https://github.com/ietf-tools/xml2rfc/releases/tag/v3.16.0 for
>>> release details.
>>>
>>> New changes include,
>>> * Permit non-ASCII within <t> without the use of <u>.
>>
>> Isn't an unconditional use of non-ASCII a violation of RFC 7997?
> 
> It should not be, but it would be good to hear which parts of 7997 you think would be violated so we can update the RFC.
> 

I summarized the rules in my response to Jay.  As RFC 7997 clearly listed a finite list of exceptions to the "no Unicode rule".  Permitting Unicode characters in <t> element clearly extends that list, and so violates RFC 7997.

-- 
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Email: marc@petit-huguenin.org
Blog: https://marc.petit-huguenin.org
Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email