Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML format
Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Mon, 13 February 2023 21:03 UTC
Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
X-Original-To: rswg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rswg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 712EDC14CF17 for <rswg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Feb 2023 13:03:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rpapK821VCaW for <rswg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Feb 2023 13:03:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net (mailb2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.154]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DEB0DC14F739 for <rswg@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 13 Feb 2023 13:02:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4PFxcj4hn8z1pYy3 for <rswg@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 13 Feb 2023 13:02:45 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1676322165; bh=4s1bPQs4JQ2VRZ4CBHeUsib9wQo6LrdJQgK/Im3K6rI=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=g+GP4vzSR28jLHRS5fATDtty4xJfbIEAwok5CvimBvEGlnLloOftpp1+1zVrqi9dG gtoz9Yvqcx0OY9yymgUdJiW2lQSM2Kyh3qvyT7qVhoJ6FUApLgiiUZH7uIxiMlyPeJ WUt+zmHEnGwChlCtOcLlre1XrxeV9W4pqcm7zrvo=
X-Quarantine-ID: <eS2zL2SHQQm7>
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net
Received: from [192.168.21.74] (unknown [50.233.136.230]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4PFxcj1B4dz1pMJ0 for <rswg@rfc-editor.org>; Mon, 13 Feb 2023 13:02:45 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <6dbd98f2-9fd5-76e5-0071-d697abda75c4@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 16:02:43 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1
Content-Language: en-US
To: RSWG <rswg@rfc-editor.org>
References: <CABcZeBM1TKqRkXJ8JErVijoKhEKOa+ebWDpxfERuq1NhUrSG4g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBM1TKqRkXJ8JErVijoKhEKOa+ebWDpxfERuq1NhUrSG4g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rswg/LxrJVcuKcMuJj-Cy6j0Zpzdny_E>
Subject: Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML format
X-BeenThere: rswg@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "RFC Series Working Group \(RSWG\)" <rswg.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rswg>, <mailto:rswg-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rswg/>
List-Post: <mailto:rswg@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rswg-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rswg>, <mailto:rswg-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 21:03:26 -0000
Rereading this email several times, I think I am missing some minor aspects. I think the idea is that the RFC in its main body would contain: 1) description from 7990 that continues to apply 2) descriptions from draft-irse-xml2rfcv3-implemented that are agreed to apply going forward 3) descriptions of changes to the format that the rswg (and then the community) have adopted in addition to the above two. I can not find where item 3 is described in the text you sent. Probalby my mis-reading. And then, in the appendix, there would be a record of 1) Any things from 7990 that were removed / obsoleted / significantly modified in the process 2) any items from -implemented that were rejected by the process So that the appendix would allow one to construct the description of what is "currently" implemented. Have I understood that properly? Is there any way to do that such taht it would be easier for a reader to reconstruct the interim state if / when they need to figure it out? I don't know what this says about the referenced emergency changes, and how those would be described. Thanks, Joel On 2/13/2023 3:27 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > Hi RSWG members, > > Pete and I have been chatting about the best way forward for evolving > the XMLv3 grammar. We think that there's broad agreement that: > > 1. We need some document that describes the "as-is" xmlv3 format. > - That document should be published in some form that implies > it doesn't have consensus. > - The WG should do the work of making sure that happens > 2. We need to work on a new format (v3.1?) that will have consensus. > > I think people are assuming that the new format will need an RFC but > there is not agreement on whether the "as-is" should be. > > > Pete and I would like to propose the following way forward, based > on a suggestion from Martin Thomson in January. > > - Adopt draft-irse-draft-irse-xml2rfcv3-implemented as a WG document > to use as the basis for v3.1. > > - Everything that doesn't match RFC 7990 will be marked as > "provisional". We go through all of these and either adopt them as > having consensus or decline to make the change, in which case we > move them to an Appendix. > > - If necessary, we can also update the I-D to make consensus changes > to the as-is version on an "emergency" basis, though hopefully > this will not be needed often. > > At the end of this process, we will have a document which describes > the consensus format and also an appendix which describes how "as > implemented" differs from the consensus format. These can be published > together as an RFC, which will provide archival forms of both but > without requiring that we publish an RFC of the current document while > the consensus version is still in flux. In the meantime, the ID > can serve as the definition of the current format. > > What do people think of this proposal? > -Ekr >
- [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML format Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Salz, Rich
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Joel Halpern
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Jay Daley
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Jay Daley
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Martin Thomson
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… John Levine
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… John Levine
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Mark Nottingham
- Re: [Rswg] [Ext] Making progress on evolving the … Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Eliot Lear
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… John R Levine
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Mark Nottingham
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Mark Nottingham
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… John Levine
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Carsten Bormann
- [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progress … Robert Sparks
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Carsten Bormann
- [Rswg] XML luggage [preptool luggage (was Re: Mak… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rswg] [Ext] XML luggage [preptool luggage (w… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Rswg] [Ext] XML luggage [preptool luggage (w… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Jean Mahoney
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… John Levine
- Re: [Rswg] [Ext] XML luggage [preptool luggage (w… John Levine
- Re: [Rswg] [Ext] XML luggage [preptool luggage (w… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rswg] [Ext] XML luggage [preptool luggage (w… John R Levine
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Julian Reschke
- [Rswg] Order (Re: preptool luggage (was Re: Makin… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… John Levine
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Martin Thomson
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Joel Halpern
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Martin Thomson
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Martin J. Dürst
- [Rswg] Are 'archival' and 'canonical' actually re… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Rswg] [Ext] XML luggage [preptool luggage (w… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Jay Daley
- Re: [Rswg] Are 'archival' and 'canonical' actuall… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Jay Daley
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Martin Thomson
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… John Levine
- Re: [Rswg] preptool default luggage (was Re: Maki… John Levine
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Jay Daley
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Jay Daley
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Martin Thomson
- Re: [Rswg] preptool default luggage (was Re: Maki… Mark Nottingham
- Re: [Rswg] preptool default luggage (was Re: Maki… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Rswg] preptool default luggage (was Re: Maki… John R Levine
- Re: [Rswg] preptool default luggage (was Re: Maki… Jay Daley
- Re: [Rswg] preptool luggage (was Re: Making progr… Jay Daley
- Re: [Rswg] preptool default luggage (was Re: Maki… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rswg] preptool default luggage (was Re: Maki… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Rswg] preptool default luggage (was Re: Maki… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Pete Resnick
- Re: [Rswg] [Ext] Making progress on evolving the … Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Rswg] [Ext] Making progress on evolving the … Pete Resnick
- Re: [Rswg] [Ext] Making progress on evolving the … Robert Sparks
- Re: [Rswg] [Ext] Making progress on evolving the … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rswg] [Ext] Making progress on evolving the … Robert Sparks
- Re: [Rswg] [Ext] Making progress on evolving the … Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Rswg] Making progress on evolving the XML fo… Eric Rescorla