Re: [Xml-sg-cmt] is "example" an acceptable type within <artwork>

Hi Lynne, xml-sg-cmt,

> In the case of both <artwork> and <sourcecode>, is it OK for authors to use whatever type they deem appropriate for their document, even if the type isn't used or listed anywhere else?

Based on John’s reply, I believe artwork types should only be svg, ascii-art, or empty.  <sourcecode> types are being vetted by xml-sg-cmt before being added to the list.  

For sourcecode type=“example” or type=“drawing” - I expect that the options are:
- specify the type of code 
- leave type empty
- use <artwork>

Is this correct?  Or are these values acceptable sourcecode types? 

Thanks,
Sandy 

> On Mar 3, 2022, at 6:45 PM, Lynne Bartholomew <lbartholomew@amsl.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi, KC and everyone.
> 
> Thank you for sending this to <xml-sg-cmt@ietf.org>, KC!  A similar question came up for me as well -- this time for <sourcecode>.
> 
> draft-ietf-httpbis-priority-12 has four <sourcecode> entries with type="example" and two with type="drawing", so I asked the authors if they would like to request that type="example" and type="drawing" be added to the list of usable sourcecode types on <https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/sourcecode-types.txt> (because I was under the impression that if a type isn't explicitly listed as acceptable, it shouldn't be used unless someone decides to add it to the list in question, i.e., <artwork> or <sourcecode>).
> 
> In the case of both <artwork> and <sourcecode>, is it OK for authors to use whatever type they deem appropriate for their document, even if the type isn't used or listed anywhere else?
> 
> Thanks again.
> 
> Lynne
> 
>> On Mar 3, 2022, at 5:17 PM, Karen Moore <kmoore@amsl.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi team,
>> 
>> In RFC-to-be 9112 (which is currently in AUTH48), Julian would like to set the type to “example” within the <artwork> elements (since they are not ascii-art).  Is this acceptable, or do you see any issues with this? There are three instances in the text.
>> 
>> One example
>> 
>> Old:
>>   <artwork type=“ascii-art"><![CDATA[
>>    https://www.example.org/pub/WWW/TheProject.html
>>    ]]></artwork>
>> 
>> New:
>>   <artwork type=“example"><![CDATA[
>>   https://www.example.org/pub/WWW/TheProject.html
>>   ]]></artwork>
>> 
>> 
>> The files are here:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9112.txt
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9112.pdf
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9112.html
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9112.xml
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Karen
>> 
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>> 
>>> From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>
>>> Subject: Re: AUTH48 [KC]: RFC 9112 <draft-ietf-httpbis-messaging-19.txt> NOW AVAILABLE
>>> Date: March 1, 2022 at 11:47:25 AM PST
>>> To: Karen Moore <kmoore@amsl.com>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
>>> Cc: httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, httpbis-ads@ietf.org, Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com>, "rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org" <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
>>> 
>>> Am 11.02.2022 um 20:21 schrieb Karen Moore:
>>>> ...
>>> 
>>> Hi Karen,
>>> 
>>> I found three cases where we have examples in <artwork> elements, and none of these cases are "ascii-art". Please revert (or apply attached XML).
>>> 
>>> Best regards, Julian
>> <rfc9112-to-be.xml>
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Xml-sg-cmt mailing list
> Xml-sg-cmt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml-sg-cmt