Re: [Tools-discuss] [Rswg] Is there a reason to allow prepped content in rfcxml Internet-Draft submissions

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Mon, 05 June 2023 19:57 UTC

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.600.7\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <69781036-0c86-fd20-8e3b-6b44bc395921@nostrum.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2023 21:57:05 +0200
Cc: "rswg@rfc-editor.org" <rswg@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2A8B6DDE-8527-4EAC-8A9C-36CC91933485@tzi.org>
References: <69781036-0c86-fd20-8e3b-6b44bc395921@nostrum.com>
To: tools-discuss <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/aLBD-kGLJ3OSFD5mPMMd9UTdzcQ>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] [Rswg] Is there a reason to allow prepped content in rfcxml Internet-Draft submissions
Precedence: list

[Rswg] Is there a reason to allow prepped content in rfcxml Internet-Draft submissions

Yes, there is a reason. Running the preptool makes sure all external includes are resolved.

But of course there are better ways to achieve this.

> Should the submission interface for Internet-Drafts allow any prepped content at all?

Probably not.

> Where would it be problematic if the submission checks rejected any submission containing that content?

Not from my point of view.
Of course, the error message must be useful, so the submitter knows what they actually need to change.

Grüße, Carsten

[Tools-discuss] Is there a reason to allow preppe… Robert Sparks
Re: [Tools-discuss] [Rswg] Is there a reason to a… Michael Richardson
Re: [Tools-discuss] [Rswg] Is there a reason to a… Carsten Bormann