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

Miek Gieben <> Sat, 05 October 2019 07:22 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C63471200DE for <>; Sat, 5 Oct 2019 00:22:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OfDmuKAdvnM5 for <>; Sat, 5 Oct 2019 00:22:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::429]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 885F512004E for <>; Sat, 5 Oct 2019 00:22:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id h4so841274wrv.7 for <>; Sat, 05 Oct 2019 00:22:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=RdudUUBGwT+R2EkIJlOYVoRK3ePtqJbAL33QfWVZz1k=; b=BYaGNU997fdqU+yA+GtLTJmAvFPxm43OheT/BJsk3StRtFqcH7nBSOlY9UaZts2IRg VKcc+JuT3J/yuTaj7gE4v9TvY3zViLxmc5Dq2NMb6i+YsDrHwLEEranRQbLpikuR8HYV kHVBxyEFqQUKVwrHupgIXUFkCbWihm0SLttHIJJfblguIiBSQIXh7Ook0bqWCMcAOlgX p1mffGQiUsxavQLSFMGk/2vnBpBDMsZmN70XOSwNvhhe69iiC6/vadoUQdVb3kv29Ug4 N+XS68G+9lTMauiqRgJS/T8kPrVANftItvbAt9oM1MSLgKZr7X+K7Al3Knk3FbyMwWum XbNg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=RdudUUBGwT+R2EkIJlOYVoRK3ePtqJbAL33QfWVZz1k=; b=Kb/aaTDL/v4Spt9PvTCiTM2YXLAHJ9gzUiGprLSSH5kQzY1ir/i/mxbXk8TQZKlkM8 yWkGOQdFOtV7alDtaDWcMtacqovA9nYY437qoscnmiZc+a/8Z4KpqyJxY7TOqNHn2wg1 WJt0rnnCr9F/mdANRjmGfZbBi/11GfQqOOQH46/gh82lx9mxA524yrrmFzldXR0vtNkA 4Bvy4ZV4cAv//C2he6prKmwLy2fbMX0cpWQfHSIjQW56/T/QnEzjEho++XaFqplNN545 OCp1V9+2eX5PFNQxFlchnDUzES42aMcpHEmXJz02Wd7Z+5YmE5vwEsfUEpTaVr94TQKX QMVw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWUliRH+d/Rwh7KCOhUOjPGf+eFUNpVzz23QI4F9A1cLgi5gaA3 OHr8cp/e5z9XPvWCZX9hVPB6AQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzN60oXmfjEy/njKUdbsPz5wjg6/ePKTdjQaJZPgC0Yq1aethr1LpF0vdYH9Oq/2G1Cz/+Ptw==
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:69c8:: with SMTP id s8mr9012427wrw.32.1570260121965; Sat, 05 Oct 2019 00:22:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by with ESMTPSA id t6sm16159090wmf.8.2019. (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 05 Oct 2019 00:22:01 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2019 08:22:00 +0100
From: Miek Gieben <>
To: Carsten Bormann <>
Cc: Brian Carpenter <>, Julian Reschke <>, "" <>, "" <>, "" <>
Message-ID: <>
Mail-Followup-To: Carsten Bormann <>, Brian Carpenter <>, Julian Reschke <>, "" <>, "" <>, "" <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <>
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Rfc-markdown] [xml2rfc-dev] [xml2rfc] <br> is back, was: New xml2rfc release: v2.32.0
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: Sat, 05 Oct 2019 07:22:06 -0000

[ Quoting <> in "Re: [xml2rfc-dev] [Rfc-markdown] [x..." ]
>(If anyone wonders why I’m so slow to pick up v3 in kramdown-rfc:
>It is just too hard to guess what v3 actually is.
>And it’s changing, while stability of the authoring format is the whole point of kramdown-rfc.
>So generating v2-v3 and hoping that the RFC editor will bang the v3 derived from it into shape is the best transition strategy right now.)

I'm in the same boat with mmark. I do output xmlv3 but it's mostly what RFC7991 

So what this triggers is the following situation: once xml2rfc is deemed OK for 
the RFC editor, both Carsten and I will try to convert markdown to xmlv3, which 
will likely tricker questions (which may lead to changes, etc.). 

Making these changes now, involves reading the xml2rfc *changelog*(!), and 
doesn't provide any stability guarantees.