Re: [xml2rfc] RFC Bibtex format doi numbering incorrect

[Sandy Ginoza <[e-mail]>]

Julian,

Did you use a script to check the DOIs?  Would you be willing to share with RPC so we can run it as part of our final checks before PUB? 

Thanks,
Sandy


> On Jun 2, 2017, at 5:42 AM, Julian Reschke <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> On 2017-06-02 14:29, John Levine wrote:
>> In article <[e-mail]> you write:
>>>> Beats me.  If the references had come from bibtex, they'd be right, so
>>>> who knows what other tools they haven't been using.  As you surely know,
>>>> we can write all the tools we want but we can't force people to use them.
>>>> ...
>>> 
>>> Well, we know that an xml2rfc processor *is* used. That processor could
>>> do a sanity check on the DOIs, in which case the problem might have been
>>> detected during AUTH48.
>> Well, sure, it could fetch them and make sure they work, and not just
>> for RFCs.  Should I put in a feature request?
>> R's,
>> John
>> PS: it is my impression that some RFCs were still coming through nroff
>> until quite recently.
> 
> 
> ...those I found were already broken in the AUTH48 XML.
> 
> Best regards, Julian
> 
> _______________________________________________
> xml2rfc mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc
>