IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [xml2rfc] RFC Bibtex format doi numbering incorrect

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Mon, 29 May 2017 20:30 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC4381293FD for <xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 May 2017 13:30:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 GZM6ehiutSck for <xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 May 2017 13:30:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CD571293F4 for <xml2rfc@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 May 2017 13:30:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.121.164]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LsTjw-1dvD650Ppg-0122rf; Mon, 29 May 2017 22:30:21 +0200
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, xml2rfc@ietf.org
References: <20170528214929.56669.qmail@ary.lan> <038e5bd1-726c-599d-38cf-a65b7385856b@gmx.de> <a92f6a44-38cf-3c5a-49c8-676596f14c5f@gmail.com>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <40342552-00c2-ece5-a773-8c7646ebb715@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2017 22:30:17 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <a92f6a44-38cf-3c5a-49c8-676596f14c5f@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:k/tiu6BHe2Yg6m3PjQqFHazRBtZGrxH4Nnud5Gb/XuFrDrg0ZpQ tPwVKGWl/9CLtJARMjqpPwvWMmssLZqW05z96DGp+kmRethRNUaokm+9mpp3ovZzJMWm6OX bDmLEpBNABWyt3mrPPc6F4cIgVEUO1d7N7waSzINJCWw6NaB0Y3BN8QeGFejHr0wTb9jch+ ap/YC0j+/HOfLv5G3/PdA==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:+lhB/ynh2+E=:KvR5T+qArb4oU2zbP8ZDD3 5TuGmtF/48WZ9m46SOWOgFzgcy+6OlumAkELoUtyVo6ItVB4jO1Agld4Fa07BbEE7SxhYfaGN TAzbDtuoEN9UBA8gss6uNd61vSyaRHOem26WQP7b04erQ/EcxwulxswK2Y38BSEoIGZgXULpL dR566u/ubYAV2Yl7KExKxZ6s/WWHXNClojIhyE164x27DTrAI6P1CpIHPpUnST5ix2K5bw6t4 wGqt0GzIUX3JLobxLKkfnsRVcShvDjm3wtbcJCQibX6FpA5+6S3Lics55Ib+sMXSFCgDM9kDa 8JgXPs1/54qc6KJHEptq1dwftcwWvDUwpAqFH9FUcmvYxwgzy2cnRCBmnV7Mo4RG/SxBPI4sf uWZdUMWibJDytXe3NyOQbCnhZqP6WI3U8k0hCxkS0C9CTlv5WvvTseIvzkKmIekOz2iPOqi6d iK4doT2zhceqNn3FF+mOIwI7OsvLzNqSBQNQwQnBpxh9zjvfMlSU7UbBIsSIfLYAQbVJIfh1L nZG5YcXrMcfywhNg+X3ADwEwus4uK0hKLc5tfeY0/if6tNNonhr+1fq1tJSXbtBK6gPPhDyfN oPOYL9jyX7+I8FpMDecLvgiCpAfRKe2Hv6b1AEi/aoyjlxtWzAp6mvxGmHxLIIXnoueP8LlAL FNzeRYXcj4xUyjkkkdmkXiJrdw4WCH7HxirD8Kt1qBu0EUJdAnmdu5bOYXWvPvPluVsM8je0Q il17o9vn9aykAGYQW/uTFFrFF71c3YZRFXd03+ggzg3ebY/2SsvD+EOdxdm5AoDAgeJ2R+Dpc wL22zpK
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xml2rfc/2zLpHISpuu99YyI5Y8AcCqmNPI4>
Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] RFC Bibtex format doi numbering incorrect
X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: <xml2rfc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/xml2rfc>, <mailto:xml2rfc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/xml2rfc/>
List-Post: <mailto:xml2rfc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xml2rfc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc>, <mailto:xml2rfc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 May 2017 20:30:44 -0000

On 2017-05-29 22:17, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> ...
> But it must, since the DOIs are arbitrary strings made up by the RFC Editor.
> I don't understand your point: wherever you look up other arbitrary
> strings, such as the document title, you can look up the DOI string.
> ...

But I don't.

> I don't see why parsing <doi>10.17487/RFC0001</doi>
> is any different from parsing <title>Host Software</title>

The problem isn't parsing the rfc index, the problem is not necessarily 
having access to it.

I still don't get why we just define the mapping precisely.

Best regards, Julian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email