IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"HANSEN, TONY L" <tony@att.com> Mon, 29 October 2018 01:05 UTC

Return-Path: <tony@att.com>
X-Original-To: xml2rfc-dev@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xml2rfc-dev@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1229F123FFD for <xml2rfc-dev@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 18:05:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_DYNAMIC=1.999, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 ZB8e4qRq_t48 for <xml2rfc-dev@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 18:05:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25CC6124C04 for <xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org>; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 18:05:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0053301.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w9T14pEd032462 for <xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org>; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 21:05:06 -0400
Received: from alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp7.sbc.com [144.160.229.24]) by mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2nd5175ub1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org>; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 21:05:06 -0400
Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w9T155hg018380 for <xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org>; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 21:05:05 -0400
Received: from zlp27128.vci.att.com (zlp27128.vci.att.com [135.66.87.50]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w9T153Aw018362 for <xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org>; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 21:05:03 -0400
Received: from zlp27128.vci.att.com (zlp27128.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp27128.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id B5742400043F for <xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 01:05:03 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from MISOUT7MSGHUBAD.ITServices.sbc.com (unknown [130.9.129.148]) by zlp27128.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id A2C7F4000420 for <xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 01:05:03 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from MISOUT7MSGUSRCG.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.7.94]) by MISOUT7MSGHUBAD.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.9.129.148]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 21:05:03 -0400
From: "HANSEN, TONY L" <tony@att.com>
To: "xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org" <xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [xml2rfc-dev] [Ext] Re: RFC 7991 issue #37: Schema Issue, RFC 7991, In Section 2.12, <br>
Thread-Index: AQHUXCn+L4cO5s1BlUKevcJWeRuycqUP5HIAgCWqEQA=
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 01:05:02 +0000
Message-ID: <410BB67F-2C5A-4B9E-AF78-04D94991A082@att.com>
References: <E1g6wQ8-00057n-85@durif.tools.ietf.org> <70ee4cff-7533-13e0-d71a-ffecf2dc56f0@gmx.de> <24828f94-dbbd-4c18-8d85-333487bda367@levkowetz.com> <3ac63652-2df2-03c7-eee6-bad2cbd326d8@levkowetz.com> <B63F3A7C-AAB6-4281-BC5F-BC28E9693E43@icann.org> <2ab7b797-4a01-5327-10fb-5ae13587944f@nostrum.com> <a9cbe9b1-1ee4-b60b-bb88-d07d11afa6a3@gmx.de> <20181004192423.xexbgomdqs56pkok@miek.nl> <5694D337-A88C-4F3E-AE2D-8EA34C3A5A93@icann.org> <20181004193939.szec4ng47kp7lapv@miek.nl> <38897ac0-44a7-6b03-4e7e-e19a115fc53d@gmx.de> <b4b4ef3c-b510-9962-e3d9-21b856662bea@levkowetz.com>
In-Reply-To: <b4b4ef3c-b510-9962-e3d9-21b856662bea@levkowetz.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.210.13.249]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <2FB0EF7D501F3E4FBD174F2B0BFBAB03@LOCAL>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-10-28_13:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=867 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1807170000 definitions=main-1810290009
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xml2rfc-dev/PX3kBt8ZvCXqo_btSOsBcaf7KdU>
Subject: Re: [xml2rfc-dev] [Ext] Re: RFC 7991 issue #37: Schema Issue, RFC 7991, In Section 2.12, <br>
X-BeenThere: xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion about particulars of xml2rfc V3 design, development and code." <xml2rfc-dev.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/xml2rfc-dev>, <mailto:xml2rfc-dev-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/xml2rfc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xml2rfc-dev-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc-dev>, <mailto:xml2rfc-dev-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 01:05:08 -0000

My druthers would have been to allow it anywhere.

	Tony

On 10/4/18, 5:55 PM, "xml2rfc-dev on behalf of Henrik Levkowetz" <xml2rfc-dev-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of henrik@levkowetz.com> wrote:

    Hi Julian,
    
    On 2018-10-04 23:33, Julian Reschke wrote:
    > On 2018-10-04 21:39, Miek Gieben wrote:
    >> [ Quoting <paul.hoffman@icann.org> in "Re: [Ext] Re: [xml2rfc-dev] RFC 
    >> 799..." ]
    >>> One of the design goals for v3 was to get rid of markup that had no 
    >>> semantic meaning to the documents. We mostly succeeded at that, but 
    >>> clearly failed to clean up some of it (such as by allowing <br> in 
    >>> table cells). I still think this is a good goal, and if we want to be 
    >>> consistent, we should just rid of <br>.
    >> 
    >> If that's technically possible: +1 for removing <br> entirely
    > 
    > Misleading.
    > 
    > HTML can focus on semantic markup, because it has a sister technology to 
    > deal with presentation (CSS). We don't have that, so we need to consider 
    > common cases where a default presentation just isn't good enough.
    > 
    > I'm very surprised that people have no problem adding an attribute for 
    > hanging list presentation but then at the same time object to enforced 
    > line breaks in table cells.
    
    For me, it's not that.  It is adding <br> for that case, and not for
    others where it would be just as useful.  It's the inconsistency.
    
    
    Best regards,
    
    	Henrik

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email