Re: [xml2rfc] [xml2rfc-dev] Unicode box-drawing for a new --table-borders value?

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Mon, 01 February 2021 15:01 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
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 6544C3A11F4; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 07:01:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 Ef4r9vcZ3omA; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 07:01:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08DFC3A11F2; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 07:01:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p5089a828.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.168.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4DTrk46f2Rz10Bg; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 16:01:16 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <87lfcacstt.fsf@fifthhorseman.net>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2021 16:01:16 +0100
Cc: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>, xml2rfc@ietf.org, xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 633884476.273326-5ca77b8bed33e332fc3da64802d6fe2b
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <AD3D51EA-7109-47BE-9B45-B53E2EDBC90B@tzi.org>
References: <8735yje4kt.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <342339E7-A47C-4C51-8852-7FFBB6A8C750@eggert.org> <87lfcacstt.fsf@fifthhorseman.net>
To: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xml2rfc/FaxGkEIYazHWCcojPsaYJYW9EII>
Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] [xml2rfc-dev] Unicode box-drawing for a new --table-borders value?
X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 01 Feb 2021 15:01:22 -0000

On 2021-01-30, at 17:06, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> wrote:
> 
> Signed PGP part
> On Sat 2021-01-30 07:22:43 +0200, Lars Eggert wrote:
>> I think that would be excellent, but AFAIK Unicode can (still) only be
>> used in contact names (see the recent "Unicode in xml2rfc v3" thread
>> over on rfc-interest@). I really hope we can just get to an agreement
>> to allow Unicode anywhere in the document.
> 
> whoops, i've been using unicode (in particular, the box-drawing
> characters and a few fancy arrows) to pretty good effect (imho) in
> several I-Ds already, for example:
> 
>    https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-dkg-lamps-e2e-mail-guidance-00.html#name-multilayer-cryptographic-en
> 
> That document would be much harder to read and understand (and probably
> much longer) without the compact representations of MIME message
> structure.
> 
> Reading the thread you reference suggests that those characters are
> probably acceptable within an "artwork" or verbatim block, but maybe not
> in the regular text.

That is how xml2rfc is currently programmed.
This is fine for box-drawing, but not so great for α and β, which need to be referenceable in the text.

(A quick fix to get a preview of what will be possible with an updated policy is in http://www.tzi.de/~cabo/contact-hack.sh — you can simply reinstall xml2rfc if that screws up things for you.  This fix is necessary to build Lars’s 8132bis draft.)

> That would mean unicode *can* show up in other places in the .txt
> versions of the RFC, which is the only context where --table-borders
> really matters, afaict.  So it seems like the constraints on unicode in
> the normal text shouldn't be any formal problem with the .txt
> translation.  Does that seem like a plausible analysis?
> 
> Hopefully this change would just be a "simple matter of programming" in
> xml2rfc itself, and not some sort of policy quagmire.

I don’t think there is a change needed to support the artwork in the above-mentioned draft.

Grüße, Carsten