Re: [Rfc-markdown] [xml2rfc-dev] [xml2rfc] New xml2rfc release: v2.25.0

Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.com> Fri, 30 August 2019 09:51 UTC

Return-Path: <rgm@htt-consult.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 968F2120807; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 02:51:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 reUhshiDVZ1e; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 02:51:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from z9m9z.htt-consult.com (z9m9z.htt-consult.com [23.123.122.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C437012004F; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 02:51:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by z9m9z.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70FF66211D; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 05:51:29 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at htt-consult.com
Received: from z9m9z.htt-consult.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (z9m9z.htt-consult.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id byiGXKqqJJqm; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 05:51:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from lx140e.htt-consult.com (unknown [192.168.160.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by z9m9z.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 95848620D4; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 05:51:21 -0400 (EDT)
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Cc: Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>, XML Developer List <xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org>, xml2rfc@ietf.org, rfc-markdown@ietf.org
References: <E1i2EMD-0002SA-UW@durif.tools.ietf.org> <d82ab9f2-5913-ad0e-dc05-2be319480a3c@htt-consult.com> <e206317e-bb51-c9e6-9dc2-c9d86b13b9da@levkowetz.com> <8fdc91d2-a683-eb4d-04f1-ade8e424436f@htt-consult.com> <3646d280-9e8c-9b90-093d-9dd36967fc7a@gmx.de> <59EADF98-C4C3-4F82-9534-AB706199CB4F@tzi.org> <8be273dd-6692-99d2-9162-20a7a3515605@gmx.de>
From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.com>
Message-ID: <493d4dc2-ae06-e7da-3ca2-810ab889c7e1@htt-consult.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 05:51:09 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <8be273dd-6692-99d2-9162-20a7a3515605@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfc-markdown/WahVx8c-_cMQfX2nTTm4Vw368A0>
Subject: Re: [Rfc-markdown] [xml2rfc-dev] [xml2rfc] New xml2rfc release: v2.25.0
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, 30 Aug 2019 09:51:36 -0000


On 8/30/19 12:53 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 30.08.2019 06:43, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>> On Aug 30, 2019, at 06:21, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I need to find where 'consensus' is explained.
>>>> ...
>>>
>>> <https://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc7991.html#element.rfc.attribute.consensus> 
>>>
>>
>> I’m not sure whether you are serious when you say the attribute is 
>> “explained” there.
>> Yes, there is text about this attribute.
>> No, it is not explained.
>> The reference to 7841 just points to more text about “consensus” 
>> there, but not about the meaning of this attribute.
>
> There's more text at
> <https://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc7991.html#attribute-consensus>;
> and the main definition should reference that:
>
>> A.3. The "consensus" Attribute
>>
>> For some of the publication streams (see Appendix A.2), the "Status 
>> of This Memo" section depends on whether there was a consensus to 
>> publish (again, see Section 3.4 of [RFC7841]).
>>
>> The consensus attribute can be used to supply this information. The 
>> acceptable values are "true" (the default) and "false"; "yes" and 
>> "no" from v2 are deprecated.
>>
>> The effect of this value for the various streams is:
>>
>>     "independent": none.
>>     "IAB": mention that there was an IAB consensus.
>>     "IETF": mention that there was an IETF consensus.
>>     "IRTF": mention that there was a research group consensus (where 
>> the name of the research group is extracted from the <workgroup> 
>> element).
>
> Best regards, Julian

Oh, Dear Lord, this is such a wonderful addition that captures the state 
of work.  It just calls out for an April 1 RFC!!!!!

Is if fine grain enough.  What about design team consensus, or work 
group consensus, to Webster's definition of consensus to Oxford 
definition of consensus (boy was that a fun meeting of US and UK people 
back in '95!: "We have consensus here." "What are you saying, we do not 
consent to this proposal!").

Then if there is a consensus attribute, where is the running_code 
attribute.  How many interoperable versions?

Oh the potential!!!!

Carsten and Julian, are you up for an RFC on this one?    :)

I would love to see your German take on the US vs UK discussions on 
tabling...

Bob