[Tools-discuss] Can't have a block quote in a definition list definition?
Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Sat, 28 January 2023 19:40 UTC
Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2A29C14CEE4 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Jan 2023 11:40:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
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 gMCjFv7Rokry for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Jan 2023 11:40:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:32::15]) (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 4C05DC14CEFE for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Sat, 28 Jan 2023 11:40:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.217.124] (p548dc9a4.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.201.164]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4P44YP227MzDCbg; Sat, 28 Jan 2023 20:40:41 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.7\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2023 20:40:37 +0100
Cc: RSWG <rswg@rfc-editor.org>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 696627637.3417391-8c70e05ae65ea2406bee0e58bc1656e6
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3B4DBAD9-6361-4A75-B7BF-4592AEC92AEE@tzi.org>
To: tools-discuss <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/dRu3rI6UyTAAxLXA3eGNNFJvHZ4>
Subject: [Tools-discuss] Can't have a block quote in a definition list definition?
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2023 19:40:53 -0000
I just ran into another one of the RFCXMLv3 grammar mysteries: You can’t have block quotes (<blockquote) in a definition list definition (<dd). Whoever thought this up apparently never defined a term that already was defined elsewhere, which is likely to suggest quoting that exact definition. In a block quote. To add insult to injury, asides (<aside) *are* allowed by the grammar in definition list definitions. These also look exactly like block quotes in the HTML. Let it herewith be declared that asides you find in my documents within definition list definitions are most likely block quotes that just have to hide. (The human reader will be able to distinguish.) Maybe we can add an element to the grammar that says that the following element really is a different one but is not allowed by the current grammar? Or maybe this can be a processing instruction. https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/200 https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/issues/194 Grüße, Carsten
- [Tools-discuss] Can't have a block quote in a def… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Tools-discuss] [Rswg] Can't have a block quo… Carsten Bormann