Re: [Rswg] I-D Action: draft-rswg-rfc7990-updates-02.txt

Paul and Heather:

I am finding the transition from "format" to  "versions" more difficult than expected.  Can "RFCXML format" be replaced by "RFCXML schema" throughout this document?

The second paragraph of Section 1.2 talks about "publication versions".  This is expected based on the list of changes in Section 1.1. However, the very next paragraph still talks about "publication formats".

Section 2 says:

   The XML file will not contain any XMLRFC vocabulary elements or
   attributes that have been marked deprecated.

This seems to require the RPC to edit all old XML files that include a deprecated XMLRFC vocabulary elements to make it go away.  Please be explicit if that is the intent.  I know the ones that we have been discussion can be scripted, but it is not clear that will always be the case.

Section 2 talks about a "variety of formats". Given the shift to "publication versions" I think we need a way to align the terms.

Russ

> On Dec 6, 2023, at 3:15 PM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> 
> Internet-Draft draft-rswg-rfc7990-updates-02.txt is now available. It is a
> work item of the RFC Series Working Group (RSWG) Editorial Stream Working
> Group of the IETF.
> 
>   Title:   Updated RFC Format Framework
>   Authors: Paul Hoffman
>            Heather Flanagan
>   Name:    draft-rswg-rfc7990-updates-02.txt
>   Pages:   11
>   Dates:   2023-12-06
> 
> Abstract:
> 
>   In order to improve the readability of RFCs while supporting their
>   archivability, the definitive version of the RFC Series transitioned
>   from plain-text ASCII to XML using the RFCXML vocabulary; different
>   publication versions are rendered from that base document.  This
>   document is the framework that provides the problem statement, lays
>   out a road map of the documents that capture the specific
>   requirements, and describes how RFCs are published.
> 
>   This document obsoletes RFC 7990 and makes many significant changes
>   to that document.  It also updates the stability policy in RFC 9280.
> 
>   This draft is part of the RFC Series Working Group (RSWG); see
>   https://datatracker.ietf.org/edwg/rswg/documents/
>   (https://datatracker.ietf.org/edwg/rswg/documents/).  There is a
>   repository for this draft at https://github.com/paulehoffman/draft-
>   rswg-rfc7990-updates (https://github.com/paulehoffman/draft-rswg-
>   rfc7990-updates).  Issues can be raised there, but probably should be
>   on the mailing list instead.
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rswg-rfc7990-updates/
> 
> There is also an HTMLized version available at:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-rswg-rfc7990-updates-02
> 
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-rswg-rfc7990-updates-02
> 
> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at:
> rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
> 
> 
> -- 
> rswg mailing list
> rswg@rfc-editor.org
> https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rswg