Re: [Tools-discuss] .txt? [I-D Action: draft-xxx.txt]

Warren Kumari <> Tue, 29 June 2021 13:55 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52A693A351B for <>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 06:55:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QpEVHPr1j6fv for <>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 06:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C5F23A3514 for <>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 06:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id q18so5279547lfc.7 for <>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 06:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cSWepUb59eKioKgCYV4HSiP7tsxU/QM7rcjU3qvYLiE=; b=xTVFznkv9FxF2YwzT5xlsZ1UbjrVGBtYyhr2hvGl+jvsaYYCmDrql9TA+V8GB2ubyH jwEL35pJnv2dm2HCaOwBXywSsusdyqKodcqsg+iaYHEkEl6cQvBj89RjNgjSAGlJDs3V DZkBNvYKIZfFqed5FRo6XpwoWbEgAh9E0/ophMJ6auX9EVjMUtbOhA1a4Sv5Jxl6PaDd HHlsY5Q2q3mzA6wije3oFWeQqFTpPrA5/YyZML/b68s+8OM8KJOIbHliO90OwxV+Q6KU TIwYjAulABApbnjt0rYPlVqS5WOfyNmq0uZuGHH3zNiHsXf8/Om+alb8GRyPAc7eSDea PYJQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cSWepUb59eKioKgCYV4HSiP7tsxU/QM7rcjU3qvYLiE=; b=deOVq8NfuXKyTISmV6ZtL3ToZdzMkivQVhLFN0gUj7DN8mZaeaMwXkwCRYnJzqDCzR VrQRvrOAXXRAxCbGYZSkLBTVOFTSy6j5HN2s84FjGYd3QSlguQcKyxd+p+Mh5qQP5Hhu vPexjnblqinqdTZbZGVgmVt0winhOkMIF3K5TlIxkMZl4f5weQgJ0i+luUF5cIfGZnf3 Gi4AQfgtAb4Tkwy+ksId1/waJ12/jf7QxFV6nj+2dfIGHcdNsLcFyGxb+0BdMTANNWpQ kGNotNHhxwaROYxQ55oMelJYl/5OwLbq0XNbUW9hRENXjozhYQ6l4MuDVFqOffYfPWCp 5SIA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530g2KjHcwORJW+kPGB1h0f5y1bZnCfFBcptriskn3cyGnVhNY2d nKf/fgTQ+6Vnfarb0bmnNetVXEOyqWhPNDOSbuGCAg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzp0SGP5W8DhHRP4QBSASKQc9vW8BNlQfBvgp1zbBWaHuPnQWV896js2V0gJLgHqVUi7GqAUjBRis77mWW5Ato=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:551b:: with SMTP id j27mr23198048lfk.459.1624974900438; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 06:55:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210627013258.1D30F188447C@ary.qy> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Warren Kumari <>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 09:54:24 -0400
Message-ID: <>
To: Brian E Carpenter <>
Cc: Toerless Eckert <>, John R Levine <>, Tools Discussion <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] .txt? [I-D Action: draft-xxx.txt]
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 13:55:11 -0000

On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 5:48 PM Brian E Carpenter
<> wrote:
> > I still don't know what else i as an author
> > would benefit from in v3.
> 1. A very nice looking HTML result instead of a geeky thing.

This is working on the assumption that I *wanted* an HTML result and
not a "geeky thing" which has 50+ years of deployment, tradition and
recognizable look-and-feel. The falls into the bug, not feature bucket
for me.

> 2. UTF-8

Ok, this one I like.

> 3. SVG. Hard work to use, but well worth it.

Again, see #1. I believe that requiring that complex things be
explainable using ASCII art was a feature - if your protocol is
sufficiently complex that it cannot be easily explained using words
and ascii art, it's probably too complex.

> 4. Using tools that are currently maintained.

Tools like the XML2RFC XMLMind plugin were working just fine with the
V2 format; every few years I'd release a new version when XMLMind
updated their major version, but it was literally just a version bump.
Same thing for my "copy the last RFC, change the title and words". #4
sounds very much like "people weren't keeping the tools maintained the
way we liked, so we made a breaking change to force them to abandon
what they were doing, and use what we think is better.

Anyway, I realize that this ship has sailed, and I'm doing a good
impression of "Old Man Yells at Cloud"... but someone asked why more
stuff wasn't being submitted in v3 format, and this is at least one
set of reasons why...


> I've had no trouble at all editing XML in v3. The only real
> annoyance is that the converter can't do anything sensible with
> <vspace blankLines="1"/> which I used to use a lot. Everything
> else is trivial.
> (The converter insists on inserting lots of format="default"
> and toc="default" which are just noise and can be deleted.)
> Regards
>    Brian
> On 29-Jun-21 07:38, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> > I only converted the last rfc i was editor for during the final revisions to go to rfc,
> > and i only did this so i could use the only one new feature of v3 that i felt i wanted
> > to use, name the Contributors tag. I still don't know what else i as an author
> > would benefit from in v3.
> >
> > I did find the conversion sufficient for that last mile to RFC editor, but not persuasive to
> > suggest it to authors if/when they want to continue doing mayor edits to the document. This
> > is primarily beceause the v3 ended up with a tag-verbose XMLv3 than the v2 i had
> > edited for years. This specifically included inlining the rfc/draft references as opposed
> > to keeping the references, but also several other tags that where written out more verbosely
> > and with a lot of default parameters (unnecessarily).  Hope i remember this all correctly.
> >
> > This v2->v3 conversion process feels a bit like attempting to have a good idea but then
> > outsource the conversion cost.  Reminds me of linux. Great new SDK/Library, but now all
> > the third-party apps developed against an older version have to be rewritten. In comparison,
> > in Windows i can have 10 versions of the same core SDK co-installed and all the old but
> > still useful programs will still run. But no linux distributions do not support such slotting
> > or do not compile all old library versions, and library developers don't care about supporting
> > multi-slotting... *sigh*
> >
> > Chers
> >     Toerless
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 26, 2021 at 10:40:40PM -0400, John R Levine wrote:
> >>>> Among the many things on the to-do list is to redo the I-D submission page
> >>>> to make it clearer that you only need to submit one version of a draft,
> >>>> and that we'd appreciate the XML version if you have one.
> >>>
> >>> Excellent. Is there any reason not to run the v2 to v3 converter automatically?
> >>
> >> We really want people to stop using v2.  It's obsolete and missing some
> >> semantic features of v3.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> John Levine,, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
> >> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail.
> >>
> >> ___________________________________________________________
> >> Tools-discuss mailing list -
> >> This list is for discussion, not for action requests or bug reports.
> >> * Report datatracker and mailarchive bugs to:
> >> * Report bugs to:
> >> * Report all other bugs or issues to:
> >> List info (including how to Unsubscribe):
> >
> ___________________________________________________________
> Tools-discuss mailing list -
> This list is for discussion, not for action requests or bug reports.
> * Report datatracker and mailarchive bugs to:
> * Report bugs to:
> * Report all other bugs or issues to:
> List info (including how to Unsubscribe):

The computing scientist’s main challenge is not to get confused by the
complexities of his own making.
  -- E. W. Dijkstra