[xml2rfc-dev] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-levkowetz-xml2rfc-v3-implementation-notes-09#section-3.1.20

[Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>]

...see also
<https://github.com/rfc-format/draft-iab-xml2rfc-v3-bis/pull/107>, which
I believe is misguided.


> 3.1.20.  In Section 2.46.2, "numbered" Attribute
>
>    The text indicates that only top-level sections may have
>    numbered="false", and that a section with numbered="false" may not
>    have a child section with numbered="true".  But that leaves no value
>    that is valid for child sections of an unnumbered section: They
>    cannot have numbered="false", since they are not top-level sections,
>    and they cannot have numbered="true", since the parent has
>    numbered="false".

That is correct, but very easy to fix by saying that numbering is
inherited from the parent section.

>    Additionally, the prohibition against child sections having
>    numbered="false" removes the option of truncating the ToC listing for
>    some child sections; without providing a good explanation for this
>    limitation, it seems arbitrary and counter-intuitive to disallow this
>    feature.

That doesn't make any sense - the presence in the ToC does not depend on
numbering at all. To control the ToC, we already have
<https://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc7991.html#element.section.attribute.toc>.

>    Proposal:  Permit sections which are not top-level sections to have
>       numbered="false".
>
>    Implementation:  In The current version of xml2rfc, child sections
>       may have numbered="false".

Limiting this to top-level sections was very intentional; the reasons
given above are IMHO not sufficient at all for this change.

Heather, by any means, please undo this change for now.

Best regards, Julian