Re: [Tools-discuss] [rfc-i] Proposed survey on I-D authoring tools

"Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com> Thu, 01 October 2020 23:07 UTC

Return-Path: <agmalis@gmail.com>
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 0A7D13A09F8; Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:07:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Zt3b7FfN-VKr; Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:07:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qv1-xf30.google.com (mail-qv1-xf30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f30]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF9F33A0A85; Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:06:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qv1-xf30.google.com with SMTP id cr8so312323qvb.10; Thu, 01 Oct 2020 16:06:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=CESdW6J5pfUPnQ0oksC3RC4xBZuoD8BIIRU2afg85kM=; b=KI60Li+GrFY385QZefF6NwgZvbR40ijhj0wbfIMdV/xLiF66TN04SrVegjLKsqjUDY ftwDdtUEOP/1YIP5z1kgWuYGIiw3LuaTP1CeAL7Fke75XjxMnMgDW1gSt3KwoNTqm44u A0+7mIWtMIFaaQa1QpTutw/tqsXzMKzKjhaYAtneKb05NWS1i+2JbEYdUrq1T6EEVl+/ qx3nigZx4SLg7J/ZntPoB1zDtnkO5nMRnvaO1vDWBfj5Y55KiEkm3jMC2BOhYycsn5Wh RZ0AfGJ9yqEZccBPc9+W87OjO4bF7pufXX1Fx6MWcIzO5yCGEtMkwAJrAbMteFrmlkGR mAAA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=CESdW6J5pfUPnQ0oksC3RC4xBZuoD8BIIRU2afg85kM=; b=oqkCEqANSrNR6M3mPh4eZMRn206RuYGjn7pzEMNKwZ8V7ppj2LSYamSfMjVHSlR3Cb IISzXmpL9HAJ1sLorhBBDF7FNg1pNdQ2WQ4IMqnQA5auoREbISIpuuLZnzlnqRKFDE6k SASflsJUoINtzfkEkdsvYQ1Bo1B/sEYB2FNCskXVVjRAe5hjfQpfCqZRENr4QCdK/U9G 1GK/FBwFmUyVBguWq7ljV3wJ1eT9WQXVckdkRrPr748d5wDjFh8Y84ISsyn9mxiiSRJs FHQ2MCBV1+mWqwkB9BS+cmV01Y2x1P/IMT+jWlkGKkFsoRBNRrNDfImIOrLCNK7exVvC JCyQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530LfMTAHwAreuvzJbpnHsmTPhklqW/UfdQtQmYYDZJguDYm1PaQ wGbA2pTN8nM9tMS7pVpx8fTXHsfYrqdHbBpZb0tGkL/F
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzTXYAlqSHo5ZeN8gW7rYtWX1SpW1Nf6JVMzlmTHcT1Op7SPI55zSmuWYZ1voTi8wSHicCoOJneoTrDSA3znTo=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:8f2:: with SMTP id dr18mr10050019qvb.49.1601593614683; Thu, 01 Oct 2020 16:06:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <71CCD4C4-2CBA-4AD3-A254-2F19B261D882@ietf.org> <m2lfgqq2ww.wl-randy@psg.com> <1071F4D3-3F36-4012-9CBB-19DDDE6D0564@ietf.org> <m2h7req25a.wl-randy@psg.com> <9F1ABBE7-DC90-4C3C-8493-E89243C73C4C@ietf.org> <m24knepwg4.wl-randy@psg.com> <A62BA403-01EC-4142-A91C-6E675C1E1942@ietf.org> <19017.1601561002@localhost> <m2h7rendtv.wl-randy@psg.com> <DBCBE873-ACFA-423D-8ABF-9D4DEBF1AFAB@ietf.org> <CAMm+LwhbNZB89TTGeV_OTPU8Z4T4bJ7Auw+C-raqY7JnT-WCxQ@mail.gmail.com> <m2a6x5ophu.wl-randy@psg.com>
In-Reply-To: <m2a6x5ophu.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 19:06:43 -0400
Message-ID: <CAA=duU0xpnTaVDd8D+ZuZZMf4wtKZwewPzya5_Tgk9LakJwKwA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>, Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org>
Cc: Tools Discussion <tools-discuss@ietf.org>, RFC Interest <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007a50e605b0a4123c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/gN70cbqZwMiJEnJTjOKnKeqRE0E>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] [rfc-i] Proposed survey on I-D authoring tools
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 01 Oct 2020 23:07:15 -0000

Randy and Jay,

There's one thing that I think the current ecosystem is missing that I
would really enjoy using. As I've been writing RFCs and drafts since the
1980s, you can guess that I've used a whole bunch of different tools,
including editing raw NROFF, editing raw XMLv2 (I haven't yet tried that
with XMLv3), using the Word template, and so on. What I've settled on at
the moment is writing in Kramdown, which lets me concentrate more on the
content than on the formatting.

However, the one sourcing tool that I really enjoyed (and really miss) is
nroffedit, which had two sides on the display, one showing the raw nroff
and the other showing WYSIWYG formatted text, and both windows were
instantly and synchronously updated as you edited in either. Having such a
tool for either XMLv3 or Kramdown would be awesome!

Cheers,
Andy

On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 12:55 PM Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:

> > I am not so sure what the value of asking what people do today is. The
> > question that really matters is what people would do if they knew what
> > all the options were.
>
> actually, i don't really buy this.  what i use today differs from what i
> use 10 or 20 years ago, and i presume similarly going forward.
>
> what we have today, is close to a classic hourglass model, with an xml
> waist.  you can produce that however the heck you want.  and there seems
> to be a rich set of tools to produce the xml.  this seems a healthy
> ecosystem to me.
>
> and from the xml, the rfced can produce all the output formats.
>
> some really sharp and hard-working folk have produced a rich ecosystem
> of front ends.  this is great, as long as they are compatible with the
> back end.
>
> and we have a back end which is settling in from a major change.  i
> suspect we may not want to 'fix' it right now.
>
> hence my asking what all this is about.  i am trying to produce work,
> not chase this week's fashion in editing/formatting.
>
> randy
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>