Re: [Rswg] Making progress on RFC 7991-bis

[Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>]

Am 11.08.2022 um 17:42 schrieb Jay Daley:
>  From an offlist discussion it seems it would be useful if I explained where I would like the grammar to go after a v3.1 is published.
>
> The next step for me, after we tidy up the de facto situation, is to work towards a new version of the grammar that hopefully addresses the following (at least):
>
> - the <postal> situation
> - the broader use of non-latin characters
> - separating out the grammar constructs that are solely used for prepped files (such as into a separate namespace)
> - specific grammar support for IANA registries
> - removal of <relref>
> - whitespace in <tt> and possible new <term> [1]
> - fixing how/where <contact> is used.
>
> I imagine that some of these changes will not be backwards compatible and so require a v4 of the grammar.
>
> Also, while some of these might sound deep into the technology, there is a policy component - such as what are we trying to achieve with <contact> and similarly, do we want postal addresses that map to hCard or as a matter of policy do we just want to leave it as author-defined data?
>
> [1]  https://github.com/ietf-tools/xml2rfc/issues/745
>
> Jay

Excellent summary.

I would add:

- cleanup issues with <u> (such as
<https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/217>)
- cleanup issues related to front/seriesInfo duplicating information
from attributes on <rfc> (for instance:
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-levkowetz-xml2rfc-v3-implementation-notes-13.html#name-in-section-247-seriesinfo>)

Best regards, Julian