Re: [xml2rfc-dev] RFC 7991 issue #37: Schema Issue, RFC 7991, In Section 2.12, <br>

[Henrik Levkowetz <[e-mail]>]

Hi Paul,

On 2018-10-01 22:36, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On 2018-10-01 19:11, Miek Gieben wrote:
>> Are we still expecting humans to write this XML directly?
> 
> Yes. We also expect them to validate it before turning in a draft in
> XML format.
> 
>> I ask because the number of one-offs is already staggering (esp.
>> with attribute naming and the number of them).
> 
> Yes. That comes with using any markup language for rich documents. We
> struggled with this during the development of the v3 spec.
> 
>> I would hope to see some simplification of the spec, which I this
>> case means allowing br in more places or disallowing the element
>> entirely.
> 
> See Julian's response in the thread above. The WG decided

Umm?  Which WG? Could you point at the discussion?

> that it
> didn't like <br> because it causes the author to expect things that
> might not be true in all renderers, such as in the middle of section
> headings, as a run of <br><br>, and so on. However, there were many
> use cases for line breaks within a cell in a table because of the
> limitations on the horizontal space in cells.

I don't see this.  I think that if there are considerations which makes
<br> useful in for instance a 30-character width context which don't
apply in a 69-character width context or a flowing-text context on a
narrow screen, they need to be laid out explicitly.


Regards,

	Henrik

> On Oct 1, 2018, at 12:53 PM, Henrik Levkowetz <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> 
>> The more I think about this, the more I realise it is a very very
>> good point, and could also be a very important point.
>> 
>> In draft-levkowetz-xml2rfc-v3-implementation-notes, I notice that
>> of the 16 RFC 7991 schema-related issues, 7 address schema
>> irregularities or inconsistencies of one kind or another.  In order
>> to make this easier on both people who manually write draft XML,
>> and on tool creators who generate draft XML from other sources, I
>> think we should make it an explicit goal of the next revision to
>> simplify and regularize the vocabulary.
> 
> In this case, doing so would require us to remove <br> everywhere, I
> believe, because otherwise the output will surprise some and piss off
> others.
> 
> --Paul Hoffman
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ xml2rfc-dev mailing
> list [e-mail] 
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc-dev
>