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

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Tue, 09 April 2019 16:03 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
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 394F0120892; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 09:03:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net
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 jDOkWuei7mhA; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 09:03:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A41D120106; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 09:03:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1554825660; bh=eoyhCiouk7NyYysAcMwdq+X3hDT2p0PuU2FoesyxFho=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=ZyNq10zo4YPkc3LouwRNbXQjN74xUsBBkz11i+1loCo05P+P2ZhpR7Sbk765rSrIS yMeaaG6ZSByc7LLiM6x9oGNtCcc7qjCNT5d2wZm95iGTs1CpKmVAhJ0nT5DZKCwiL1 yLX/ZgcSZbplNeFkSi3Ysv98NbSBMaRcewM6EFI4=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from [192.168.178.124] ([91.61.50.130]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MGXV6-1h9Xa82XiK-00DExp; Tue, 09 Apr 2019 18:01:00 +0200
To: "HANSEN, TONY L" <tony@att.com>, Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>, "xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org" <xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org>, "xml2rfc@ietf.org" <xml2rfc@ietf.org>
Cc: "rfc-markdown@ietf.org" <rfc-markdown@ietf.org>
References: <E1hDSIW-0008DY-Hl@durif.tools.ietf.org> <c8d8c9e9-88dd-8c49-c1d4-e0438c56a03c@gmx.de> <f41d8ba2-7078-0ffa-3e41-6f8bc1d0f766@levkowetz.com> <dfcbd237-bbff-867d-b704-cb874c4b2ed3@gmx.de> <b760846d-5183-ad8a-dd42-62a7800bdbf6@levkowetz.com> <561D7097-7155-4DDD-8C5D-FA65663B5105@att.com> <280b0cf8-a7d0-0334-42fe-a9cd6e7966d7@gmx.de> <1DC0E053-509F-4531-9EAF-1A287FFA4ECD@att.com>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <8cedc522-614c-039c-e550-8f5494ab040f@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 18:01:00 +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: <1DC0E053-509F-4531-9EAF-1A287FFA4ECD@att.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:dMh7S7LR4TET04ij5d2oZTUa7qWwRAS+PzmwcqFDePMEd39RwWJ TC9EaeNKQKSoQ2Y/KGzTN1DvQTNHmy3kQd/WK3s/OmP90CayORtJ6QySZe3hprjmiHbbLme 5sNBl9uwtB/VUgFt378pOeYRnRyveGVsmTl9JxTKLno43i4+fqlDENEvseiLuxqRVQtLO10 KANeusuIEY3T2VRbiYYqA==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:9K2hVelIlpc=:MeyUsSxVYetLfRlwrCgKK1 ykxHIlw099AmMsSClmuBWpZ+a1UONac49H5LdUA1dxyfFX72KQEyTaj5QlNtyxME5Sl0WGDa7 1vLKcmU8bXvf9l1A0Zz/Gjr34mIt+FaeidQt3qZaQzdf6mJr8/fF3/fSnWkNaJkKLp4WqV0gW RmD6DjYNlkK0tjynXBBPr5Fh7dWfW09RpFoyE5vouto+593sqAQN1vGqCbmYeNpQ9oMx7uS6r 8eqQpc0z4vo6i78EaPNHsSS+5nEOam6rmIm7Zk+xq+Tz4L53Hj1J5lJYp+DC2Ek3aTNFs7pkA A2MdpJvx59J0R6vZ1f2YHLoblUUiaKtsvakwzns+jg+CBI4SgZ4ikMQeTng+m3DA0F2pZla+8 UGHjfGzgxrK2I/T8ZoIvOxI1fegKQAXRacdB0700Nf9+gPzLc9lkyFG4RcKSMc8dzva0sZ8lj zUx1Ex/R+rb6PuMrbfjFrJnjqBl9PYHdghfd58ddm9aPt/cuHfm6nyqpmaOz1JWb0YIY8h5If UnfjgukY8WaIvdkTZ334q9azZj+LQad6qqKZHIeIR8+bRsIcpdHG+VtnU7cfWRRZoLI9o9rBl thPJ7m7+/QxMuQtYVIcq+ktSqzIr9KUZ5BJfIwm4vIC5wjqKJsEGojTndxIcPk3qHoOtqAPQk +gfShJManfKLQ+MyJdGK7Jtx1jbQABuGH3rU46WnmNL76PqCoOCVc0gXZbo+PqREeZN2RLN/b 3hvezATNnEFr11hTa1TJlCfEz2YmmpLLuxL9q01PdU92rZ8OvocJTauqC1XBJLGpwEqBwo2G2 +4qfdgSsNLgkRC9/5kMBpf8UOAl4JdBn3oM5xGJzYYLunq+esYLGAVHzDbmIWB4mhgvq6LZch 9e1sfsmh+yz+WpsAvN1vHcLCsCA/NWNSN6fAh4OLeZJBBaRbzuwwk/9JqCSrkvtzcY8FpXjk5 CIuA4oEPiSg==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfc-markdown/SutbHKKlkqTndux4e27OE2U-_uc>
Subject: Re: [Rfc-markdown] [xml2rfc] initials handling, was: New xml2rfc release: v2.22.3
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: Tue, 09 Apr 2019 16:03:44 -0000

On 09.04.2019 17:37, HANSEN, TONY L wrote:
> On 4/9/19, 8:19 AM, "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>      On 09.04.2019 14:11, HANSEN, TONY L wrote:
>      > ...
>      > How is the requirement to generate a single initial communicated within the XML? By looking at the RFC number? Or by a different attribute specified somewhere? While using the RFC number might seem simpler, I think it's better to be transparent and use an attribute.
>      > ...
>
>      Yes.
>
>      But we really should ask the RFC Editor whether they are sure about
>      this. After all, it seems to be a violation of the style guide:
>      <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7322#section-4.8.6.2>.
>
> For re-rendering old RFCs that were originally written using a previous style guide? The interesting thing about style guides is that they do change over time.

Yes, but in that case the rendering depends on the RFC the reference
appears in, not on the referenced document.

FWIW, it would be great if revisions to the style guide also defined a
precise start date from which the rules apply.

> I know that we've had various means of doing these stylistic machinations through the years, such as code that says "if rfc number < some value, do this special stylistic processing" or "if public date is before some value, do this special stylistic processing ". The reason I asked my question was that I don't know how the current V3 code is making its decisions for these stylistic issues. My suggestion above is that instead of having code like that, it should instead be "if some <rfc> attribute is set, do this to the initials".

Best regards, Julian