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

[Henrik Levkowetz <[e-mail]>]

Hi Julian,

On 2018-10-01 14:07, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 10/1/2018 1:31 PM, [e-mail] wrote:
>> This captures an issue noted during implementation, also described in
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-levkowetz-xml2rfc-v3-implementation#section-3.1.2
>> 
>> Specification: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7991#section-2.12
>> 
>> ---
>> In Section 2.12, <br>
>> 
>>     A number of elements permits a mixed content model (see Section "Mixed
>>     Content Model"): <li>, <blockquote>, <dd>, <td>, and <th>.  However,
>>     when using the simpler of the two content schemas, two of them (<td> and
>>     <th>) permit inline line breaks through the use of <br> elements; the
>>     others do not.  This seems terribly arbitrary.
>> 
>>     Recommendation:  Remove the <br> element completely.  Alternatively,
>>                      permit it to be used all places that 'text' and non-
>>                      block elements may be used (that is, in inline
>>                      context).
>> 
>>     Implementation:  The current version of xml2rfc renders <br> as a
>>                      newline in all inline contexts.
>> ---
> 
> As far as I recall, we ended up with the limited use of <br> because 
> forcing a line break inside a table cell sometimes really is needed, 
> while otherwise it's not. I agree consistency is nice, but this may be a 
> case where the current approach is the right one.

Experience with the use of the v3 specification is of course very limited
at present, but my awareness of the issue was triggered by attempts to use
<br> by Miek, when he started adapting his pandoc2rfc tool to use the v3
vocabulary.

I would say that even if <br> in running text would rarely be needed, the
confusion Miek ran into is unnecessary, and limiting <br> to use within
table cells, as opposed to removing it altogether or permitting it inline
everywhere is more complex for both authors and formatters to keep track
of and handle.

Hence my proposal.


Best regards,

	Henrik