[xml2rfc] 1.30pre1 patch + pending issues

[swb at employees.org (Scott W Brim)]

On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 12:17:34PM -0700, Larry Masinter allegedly wrote:
> > I disagree. Remember, the person writing the draft should in fact 
> > read what the tool outputs and can even change it if they feel like 
> > it. Regardless of which of the ipr=foo options they choose, they need 
> > to read what the tool outputs.
> 
> But
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tools-draft-submission-08.txt
> proposes allowing Internet Draft authors the option of uploading
> only the XML, and having the text automatically generated by
> the submission tool.

Good point.  We do want to head toward XML as an archival version of
an RFC.  Therefore external references should be fixed.  BCPs are
intentionally not direct -- they're abstractions, handles.  
>From paul.hoffman at vpnc.org  Thu Apr 21 13:27:07 2005
From: paul.hoffman at vpnc.org (Paul Hoffman)
Date: Thu Apr 21 12:27:19 2005
Subject: [xml2rfc] 1.30pre1 patch + pending issues
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <p06210281be8dae6d827d@[165.227.249.220]>

At 12:17 PM -0700 4/21/05, Larry Masinter wrote:
>  > I disagree. Remember, the person writing the draft should in fact
>>  read what the tool outputs and can even change it if they feel like
>>  it. Regardless of which of the ipr=foo options they choose, they need
>>  to read what the tool outputs.
>
>But
>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tools-draft-submission-08.txt
>proposes allowing Internet Draft authors the option of uploading
>only the XML, and having the text automatically generated by
>the submission tool.

Then that is a bug in that draft. There are plenty of things that one 
can do to one's XML that would make parts of a draft difficult to 
read. In this case, there are things that can cause you to attest to 
things you don't believe.

Anything that "submits" an Internet Draft should allow the submitter 
to review it in the form it will be published.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
>From LMM at acm.org  Thu Apr 21 13:36:37 2005
From: LMM at acm.org (Larry Masinter)
Date: Thu Apr 21 12:36:44 2005
Subject: [xml2rfc] 1.30pre1 patch + pending issues
In-Reply-To: <p06210281be8dae6d827d@[165.227.249.220]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>


> >But
>
>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tools-draft-submission-08.tx
t
> >proposes allowing Internet Draft authors the option of uploading
> >only the XML, and having the text automatically generated by
> >the submission tool.
> 
> Then that is a bug in that draft. There are plenty of things that one 
> can do to one's XML that would make parts of a draft difficult to 
> read. In this case, there are things that can cause you to attest to 
> things you don't believe.
> 
> Anything that "submits" an Internet Draft should allow the submitter 
> to review it in the form it will be published.

The "last call" for this draft was sent to [e-mail]
on February 28, based on version -07, with a deadline for comments
2005-03-28. Version -08 was prepared based on last call comments.

http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg00970.html

There was no objections to the draft's proposal that direct submission
of .XML format, and I don't recall any comments about requiring that
authors review the text.

Larry