IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [xml2rfc] RfcMarkup not authoritative, HTML is gone?

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Mon, 16 September 2019 14:54 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 B031312084D for <xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 07:54:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net
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 hjsEOiwMyYE5 for <xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 07:54:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (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 91C7B12083D for <xml2rfc@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 07:54:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1568645641; bh=IOGeNAaHe7QMY1ia2GWJSJLK250Ig8XyBpQNacEVKD0=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=bUpw4Hnrsl+Cs6d/NNtLjc03oPLDnJ3S4f0JC8ULyjI0AycGxvOx1r5y7KpHpwW1/ p9srOCS5JFJ1QtNM3QvlKJE42ZT+7pVA24cDzTp/ETz2P890ZhazsbIl9wktHqM2yL vmbff0HySKdesNdrlKuhXB5itBFVgKm97VOu4crU=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from [192.168.1.34] ([5.10.171.186]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MRoyH-1hh30S1heL-00SvRo; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 16:54:01 +0200
To: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>, xml2rfc@ietf.org
References: <94358f7d-3465-4161-1597-f1dbfba73b3f@gmail.com> <d44ac5f1-e4c2-1239-4bea-714a721115b8@levkowetz.com> <9ceb0697-c3ae-4f14-606c-4e089f04e2f2@gmail.com> <a4874a50-ffc3-80f5-cb42-09f82072644c@gmx.de> <04713f10-5c19-2ad5-2fa6-2db5f1ed5599@gmail.com> <f5554cd0-9c74-3a8c-5af9-25b947d499d8@gmx.de> <7bb2a5fb-262d-39b5-3bb0-72e068923ea7@gmail.com> <c3c8db0e-e719-32e6-ca3c-736e25ce8936@gmx.de> <f2f49552-091d-50e4-e2e2-2fdd30cbb7ae@gmail.com> <bd07ad5a-a0a7-f821-54ec-c09ee5614e2a@gmx.de> <d9883584-1d5e-4d34-9bde-00d32dc49435@gmail.com> <599cb714-89e8-271c-4d5e-ba294fa7d3cf@alum.mit.edu> <ee1a1699-a5e3-3c2b-ad53-ff80a120f7eb@gmail.com>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <dcf93ec6-bb2c-3323-a98d-41c9bcdc4e8d@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 16:54:01 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <ee1a1699-a5e3-3c2b-ad53-ff80a120f7eb@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:OVTfRz1WsML+vORrhj3HCOzW+gzbS1zs3Rk0fU2JVazZffkMrqF 0jGr5zganUldSTms2ktjecsBh3njEC8LHAfWLTofu17SDIa6GJbZPaH8MgdE8RnCedvpe60 wvXn6oPEaZkDYDni0PA35bL22iuZvVPkiYdxqKJ7UtOw/gC4jELlGljR2xTNSK5b7mSFPIZ qdKHCu2WV6Abh54jCSyqg==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:fflbATCggsM=:3nm8u3gRRTEc9+MS3Li4jK RpoycEaSnmb6ZVi2eDRsOg2ztVhTC1ICBOZEtzX7t+IIgljGxcTsKJddcXMkSCdlO0jGRjKzh 1n6CG6lWRO0pSOotRcXiDZWlIIccedo5hKBRk8JtOVz5gsDELrzzn3g+ZOc6qK582l36rdmW/ /Sf4dyvl+DYyNSo+e8ORW68nHQjJ4hXB+TK/HsSX6BMMK1pbGpdAVknShd7ia63yc/krgks9h d0ROSo+o7Jeokb9ac2kDGCo0e5RV/+/6CFCfjg61V4BnMz7nA8gqWEuEmPEXYKj5K1+dCU0cF u6xOatcJT1F7289tcGquFwOtRs5il0ZjBMTdDmQSDkKPuWu2UihoAkBR7rYXIjKcLMD+JCshw JFaD4jl2O/Wcta5TIC7R0qK69+FB7ByXVxUdoT8IAVRXqxLECe5KGkK0rRtVKi5nZN7Wp1BVc 56dbYhoePVA0O+Xu7X7m0rHBs742Eb+t2Ztm4PtuEFb5ZxZllfXmMhVFu9Phef6mA6+Qnl/Uk iXGyFq7Ehydq+a8UoFghxnTemVQqBVVdU7/+2cInUiWle1oFH0cvjRfV8MDMPVZO59ORabjJr j/OfOO3sHJhCr+87ifBDZQaNXyZ2dkvQyiKdgwJVnx9OWftEJu8jT0xFnlTCl2Q8wZCr3sIGl /VIIwXHWfwshYVU4hrte9EiPsa/U7gVd2QgNmSd1Z0rKC0BHy3s5sqHTgz9BRcCVnnlEWBVL4 Uzekza4KlHK0Zbq4Hn8sCJprvyFIbjvMRDh/8NF6ApIk2JM92f3O4C1gPkP7jaKoxDFlGiJx5 dajhPX0M4g2NZ6kribZHp+zzmWmcW8CXcIb4sMkyAmBtfJQ7KNpqB3MzbvYlfaVudkCdXIC1G AhMGh1YaSSZBKxghpxiTrxlkozXZa/FA26tXpCbyTV8q+hWSnAd9uZ9vSFODSGfduCyBhaD4F dLOljWu7xVbXv2UacBCBfjgq8QKy037OhCs/CbfLMPW/FWbpILHLAwzj63nW200i0QmT8QtCx o3lHsGcW8YBC4dpvoGzjNiHqbS+6xfY6meEs6c3b4dX3WfOuSp9Mx3MHO98R9E4KRoJkKFew/ 6mT4oIJqeazoS6sfwyEkxvxL6fV6D8BbiC7ShR9rKO2MvP6rqGLKqmhIQbW174XLdLHUGZhNO w/88H31/xUNONvNEZtp7grmCR++sQ/NUiDm7QLRr/Kd2qL1xG+Q8ORieT7GoaJyD8wW/NawgJ jnRMzoltWEthZISETajuWEzoda/ByWZiBlA8wLoCqEX9QddNx6T1KqmW73eM=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xml2rfc/OIfW7PQyzf96-P1XUYLDvDtyNxU>
Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] RfcMarkup not authoritative, HTML is gone?
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, 16 Sep 2019 14:54:10 -0000

On 16.09.2019 16:46, Anders Rundgren wrote:
> On 2019-09-16 16:27, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
>> On 9/16/19 1:22 AM, Anders Rundgren wrote:
>>> On 2019-09-14 11:41, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> RfcMarkup has no official standing (and yes, I like it as well, and it
>>>> has served us well for a very long time). It apparently generates
>>>> XHTML,
>>>> but the content is served as text/html on tools.ietf.org. It might be
>>>> good to change it to produce valid HTML5.
>>>
>>> This in interesting and but also rather confusing since this is the by
>>> far most used method for communicating RFCs by developers.
>>
>> Do you have any data to backup this claim?
>
> No, OTOH, since I mostly work with JSON-based stuff, the documents are
> fairly recent.
>
> What I'm sure that I have newer seen in wild are references to PDF RFCs
> (which apparently are in plain text).
> ...

I agree with that, but I don't see how that supports the statement about
RfcMarkup... (it may well be true, but RfcMarkup is something that was
created because we did not have "official" HTML renderings of the
documents, and this is going to change soon anyway).

Best regards, Julian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email