Re: [Tools-discuss] [jose] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7515 (6118)

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Mon, 04 May 2020 06:00 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 647A43A0901; Sun, 3 May 2020 23:00:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 zf_7NrOmG4No; Sun, 3 May 2020 23:00:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 119813A0CB9; Sun, 3 May 2020 23:00:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.16.42.112] (p548DCD70.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.205.112]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 49Fsdk6tPkzyyG; Mon, 4 May 2020 08:00:10 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAANoGhLDiq1jcTBQo1PDpXu-3MeD0U5Qx0sNhB2ZdmpRcW-G+g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 08:00:10 +0200
Cc: jose@ietf.org
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 610264810.55007-c578121bacfd48d84d84f7eef32f59eb
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <FD2113D1-F25A-4D00-A8F5-18757852703A@tzi.org>
References: <20200422200954.2B867F40729@rfc-editor.org> <00e601d618e3$dfd06e30$9f714a90$@augustcellars.com> <CAANoGhLDiq1jcTBQo1PDpXu-3MeD0U5Qx0sNhB2ZdmpRcW-G+g@mail.gmail.com>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, Tools Team Discussion <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/vW3Dj8GD7LZWK6MBRb5WOdnbftU>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] [jose] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7515 (6118)
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: Mon, 04 May 2020 06:00:15 -0000

[On the usual problem with htmlizing links to other RFCs:]

On 2020-05-04, at 02:30, John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com> wrote:
> One day this will be fixed for new RFC but not for existing ones. 

Why not?

It would be a SMOP(*) to invest the htmlizer with knowledge about misdirected links that were discovered in existing RFCs.  Each of these errata reports (and all the existing rejected ones) would inform this.

Grüße, Carsten

(*) SMOP: Small matter of programming.
Usually said by people who don’t want to do the work themselves.