Re: [Rswg] I-D Action: draft-rswg-rfc7990-updates-03.txt

--On Saturday, February 17, 2024 08:58 +1300 Brian E Carpenter
<brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:

>> dropping the requirement that the RPC use PDF/A-3 standard
> 
> I don't believe we have consensus on that and I don't agree
> with it. IMHO we should continue to require that. Yes, I know
> there are some loose ends but they aren't our loose ends.

Concur.  I think there may be consensus on not embedding the XML
but one of the big advantages of having a PMF form at all is
that a reader can be quite sure that what they are seeing when
they look at it is the same as what another reader will see even
if the times at which they look are separated by some years.
PDF/A was designed, by experts, to accommodate just that sort of
need.  Some random approximation to PDF doesn't do the job.
So, if there is a specific objection to PDF/A-3 that might
justify PDF/A-2 or even PDF/A[-1] instead, let's hear that
argument.  But dropping PDF/A entirely seems unwise to me.

best,
   john

> On 15-Feb-24 10:53, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
>> Internet-Draft draft-rswg-rfc7990-updates-03.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-03.txt
>>     Pages:   11
>>     Dates:   2024-02-14
>> 
>> 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-upda
>> tes-03
>> 
>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-rswg-rfc7990-
>> updates-03
>> 
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at:
>> rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> I-D-Announce mailing list
>> I-D-Announce@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce