Re: [Rfc-markdown] [xml2rfc] initials handling, was: New xml2rfc release: v2.22.3

Julian Reschke <> Mon, 22 April 2019 05:23 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C88EA120072; Sun, 21 Apr 2019 22:23:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id v4gK8V549BEy; Sun, 21 Apr 2019 22:23:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98AB112006F; Sun, 21 Apr 2019 22:23:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;; s=badeba3b8450; t=1555910627; bh=b3PPbmVyhZyrPRr3yuc/7XNDfktCtLfWuxGvMRNMYNg=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=XArUj/pEkXxGe0ZHks8xxm2zS3282F3nsR4ioMMAJ4ly1tXgWuHvimW+GNogAz+ZM w1kzwlGa43aT99RzGdfoJ2azu+ELfnY4pt6DNCdAESDX5tDTqe3hTY2JskdCZ9mvcp ZnIFulyo/xKk77zJcr/FHU5V8TkVrZ5QtQ/K4G/Q=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from [] ([]) by (mrgmx101 []) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Ldcv0-1gbABN2P9W-00ijcX; Mon, 22 Apr 2019 07:23:47 +0200
To: Heather Flanagan <>
Cc: "" <>, "" <>, "" <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Julian Reschke <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2019 07:23:47 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:bHiR2E3GMbt9h8iQD9v6qggK/UxxYt+kGADiT/pWraE5VcxqBtk KiCy1sFOFzhsHnFYFag/IM6MDa0o6SySD0LZyJ1TOEDtzpx9O98nDN+0BCgCqxswAak+9eE MRTXwC3gGrpTXqg2iGTK0dKVi6At9ts+WLCaKolqqkJzFB69GlZIn4LFbtL18yzUzNC6K/k XmF7lPynMnzuWDjVj5B4A==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:u871MxrPUFE=:U8IMv3oKfVeFKetx5NWQFu YJP/8Zic7fzgc2mfVRgnUUPk2tInAu5HLi7SvN/GyeQvdnu7B8T4DzAwSlrttt4lLCNYcamNJ Zl+bimxZYGyZblMxtnISSV8IsM0j0ikI4s57AXGKhYaRJgUZC74RcsngfzVN3uVEkb/SJGXOY DVCS9AUGPuLhR5ia2Z0lh/PU3b/xNz15n0a57FM9jq0j0Rf5MI8modnOYY9Lc5yj6NjfPi02Q pGFOzeBcVNVEri52vrbZw4cR5Pp2dOdSXnjnlJomm68MiAw7BHsMSzMieGaEZQlDIgeb10ywd t43tTDjZ7diTud0bC+Jj4Tn7Heq3MMWqs+405tpIf7Uiyn/q/AFTrqUfLvj43vwaHxbf+vJwr qUY24R9jTEWvPO8Vh8Sf5ZY+g7CJAD573tLsUaZTPH3/ar5E4MYCOJ5myYCZzUKk8lQLxsq5Z qM6PriXg/cfDXw7UEccgIajxSq5pemp6ybG5iyQTdvNlyO0vYdd2cNpZNpIjzr+4Wv3vNXMTk g3qbPWWRGataJj5lExnYoeterxwJ9D7IFGT4cHt1DVCB26jRGVuUyzi8E44YzVTspU8PlcMLm RXRApxIQd6Wf2z9OQJz2+fEJ6HgaBp/IjhdQIFz7DxpGvIBvqY8jh2Hmt+SxwK6YAQqHci46F Pn0qokKgtTcZYNDENMy54dUxbw15bdXXrMQT2UxRTNBCyXvHs9DbQl9TbJdmwkP519SJGjkEE KSqAnFIGRlLkKJOMCliphtPWcW+9FPNAmswjL4G2fVOWcY/RqO8HjOqQsOb+jT0mV2sJo5Crc 5WJ/pSsIUc25aa7P62dv8AHDkVquMfI5da20dCOVlK7DDrbQ7xAC+l6wOyI9/QFW08i9dp21F v5sCa/Q4ZRvpBZYBDvbgewbNybz8V8WKy4nrkPUZbcUcRYBvGuc29s4PB3JEB1TWIQGqTRH4F BRhpDueYM8w==
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Rfc-markdown] [xml2rfc] initials handling, was: New xml2rfc release: v2.22.3
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." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2019 05:23:55 -0000

On 11.04.2019 17:06, Heather Flanagan wrote:
> ...
> And coming back to this:
> A longstanding principle for referencing RFCs is to make the reference
> match what is on the front page of the RFC itself, over what information
> is in any other location. This is something we should be clearer about
> in the Style Guide, but it is a practice we’ve enforced for quite a long
> time.

If you're not planning a revision anytime soon, you may want to document
this in detail at <> or file
an erratum.

> Changing the tool to match this longstanding practice is not ideal, but
> it is expedient given that the proper way to handle this is an extensive
> data cleanup of the citation library. I’ve asked the RPC to prioritize
> getting documents published and format implementation over this kind of
> data cleanup for now.
> ...

I still don't get this. Is there a well-defined algorithm to decide the
detailed format? I guess so, otherwise it could not be placed into the
formatter. In this case, please publish it. And if there is one, just
get the <reference> files updated accordingly. (And yes, I volunteer, if
the algorithm is clear).

Best regards, Julian