[Tools-discuss] Re: Making xi:include links to non-RFCs with bibxml

[Robert Sparks <[e-mail]>]

There are better semantic names already in place, but the numbers are so 
pervasive that they must work for the foreseeable future (even if, at 
some point, via redirect).

bibxml2 is bibxml-misc

bibxml3 is bibxml-ids

bibxml4 is bibxml-w3c

bibxml5 is bibxml-3gpp

bibxml6 is bibxml-ieee

bibxml7 is bibxml-doi

bibxml8 is bibxml-iana

bibxml9 is bibxml-rfcsubseries

Separately, there is a bibxml-nist that has no analogous bibxml{digit} 
alias.

Going forward any new datasets will have a semantic name, not a number.

In a greenfield world, I would recommend reconsidering putting the 
datasets in different namespaces as the reference names are under our 
control _anyhow_ and can be made to not collide. But we're well past that.

RjS

On 8/11/25 3:54 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> Greetings again. For drafts written in XML, we are supposed to be using xi:include elements. That works fine for RFCs:
>
> <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.1234.xml"/>
>
> Some drafts also reference BCPs, STDs, and Internet drafts. I'm using <https://bib.ietf.org/> to find the correct URLs. However:
>
> BCP 123 is:
>     https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml9/reference.BCP.0123.xml
>
> STD 10 is:
>     https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml9/reference.STD.0010.xml
>
> draft-hoffman-duj is:
>     https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.hoffman-duj.xml
>
> I'm concerned about the long-lived naming for "bibxml9" and "bibxml3" in those URLs. Is there some other URL I should be using for these? Or should those be considered long-lived?
>
> --Paul Hoffman
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> Tools-discuss mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/