Re: [Tools-discuss] Updated survey (was: Proposed survey on I-D authoring tools)

Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> Mon, 05 October 2020 13:44 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@iii.ca>
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 BE5133A0AE2 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Oct 2020 06:44:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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 DJEikdeH5jep for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Oct 2020 06:44:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp67.ord1d.emailsrvr.com (smtp67.ord1d.emailsrvr.com [184.106.54.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E49A3A0AC5 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Oct 2020 06:44:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Auth-ID: fluffy@iii.ca
Received: by smtp1.relay.ord1d.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: fluffy-AT-iii.ca) with ESMTPSA id 575D24016C; Mon, 5 Oct 2020 09:44:39 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.17\))
From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
In-Reply-To: <f0fa094f-9ea8-1ee8-25a6-90dc2ac5c071@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2020 07:44:38 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <07883E6E-F66B-40BB-8C49-ACC06340677D@iii.ca>
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> <4B2B4A68-AC82-4455-A9D1-30F3789038F9@ietf.org> <68CF84A2-7B5F-42A4-B4B7-B68C875591FA@tzi.org> <6F989ED3-4CD5-4E46-A410-965DA76E3F58@ietf.org> <E909F63E-F780-4171-B88D-D094EAC233CF@ietf.org> <f0fa094f-9ea8-1ee8-25a6-90dc2ac5c071@gmx.de>
To: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.17)
X-Classification-ID: d1804c52-db3f-49b7-8747-9965cda15c04-1-1
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/xXRN49Z3_-UTbQtuVLpZ84bR8Lg>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Updated survey (was: 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: Mon, 05 Oct 2020 13:44:42 -0000

On the questions about what people use, I think it would be good to be clear that we want to know what they use for drafts they are doing now.  For example. they may have used nroff lots a long time ago but don’t use it now. 



I think the word “invest” in the "Should the IETF invest in a new, modern toolchain for authoring drafts?” is very loaded. Many people will interpret that is create something specific for IETF. I think “move to” might be a better word than invest./



> On Oct 5, 2020, at 5:23 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> Am 01.10.2020 um 19:09 schrieb Jay Daley:
>> The updated survey is below.  Please note that
>> 
>> - this doesn’t show the links
>> - I am still not sure how to point people to their Datatracker stats page
>> - the flow logic may change when the survey is tested.
>> 
>> Further feedback is most welcome.
>> 
>> Jay
>> ...
> 
> Sorry for late feedback :-)
> 
> This is good, thanks!
> 
> The one missing thing I currently can think of is an option to provide
> information about other tools in use to either *generate* source, or to
> validate it.
> 
> For instance:
> 
> - automatic *extraction* of sourcecode (such as ABNF) with the goal of
> validation (and maybe re-inserting into an appendix)
> - automatic *insertion* of source code
> - automatic generation of document parts (such as reference tables)
> - preprocessors that extend the XML vocabulary and generate "plain" xml2rfc
> - use of SVG tools (or reasons why they are not used)
> - tools that read a textual description and generate artwork from it
> (like sequence diagrams)
> - tools that check references (such as to RFCs and IDs, and to catch
> dangling "deep" links, such as when a section number in the referenced
> document changed)
> 
> Best regards, Julian
> 
> ___________________________________________________________
> Tools-discuss mailing list
> Tools-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss
> 
> Please report datatracker.ietf.org and mailarchive.ietf.org
> bugs at http://tools.ietf.org/tools/ietfdb
> or send email to datatracker-project@ietf.org
> 
> Please report tools.ietf.org bugs at
> http://tools.ietf.org/tools/issues
> or send email to webmaster@tools.ietf.org