[xml2rfc] 1.31 formatting nit

[fenner at research.att.com (Bill Fenner)]

>1) Run your input through a conforming and validating XML parser before 
>giving it xml2rfc. This really can safe you lot of time later.

Absolutely.  If you don't have one of these handy, you can
try mine: http://rtg.ietf.org/~fenner/ietf/xml2rfc-valid/
Alternately, xml2rfc contains one that it'll invoke if you
use <?rfc strict="yes"?>.

>2) That being said, people want paragraph breaks in list items. We 
>really should fix the rfc2629 DTD in some way to allow this, so people 
>don't have to fall back to ugly hacks such as <vspace> (which is 
>presentational, not semantical markup).

I think this is sensible to brainstorm about, since it's something that
has been asked for a lot.  Something like:

<!ELEMENT list  (t+|lt+)>
<!ELEMENT lt    (t|list)+>
<!ATTLIST lt
          hangText    %ATEXT;            #IMPLIED>

Single-paragraph lists could still use <list><t>... for backwards
compatability, new lists would be formatted with <lt>..</lt> wrappers
around each item:
<list><lt><t/><t/></lt><lt><t/></lt></list>?

(A list should only be allowed to have t+ or lt+, not a mixture,
 to avoid confusion (always wrap or never wrap))

  Bill
>From julian.reschke at gmx.de  Wed Aug 30 15:14:43 2006
From: julian.reschke at gmx.de (Julian Reschke)
Date: Wed Aug 30 05:14:46 2006
Subject: [xml2rfc] 1.31 formatting nit
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
	<[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
	<[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Bill Fenner schrieb:
>> 2) That being said, people want paragraph breaks in list items. We 
>> really should fix the rfc2629 DTD in some way to allow this, so people 
>> don't have to fall back to ugly hacks such as <vspace> (which is 
>> presentational, not semantical markup).
> 
> I think this is sensible to brainstorm about, since it's something that
> has been asked for a lot.  Something like:
> 
> <!ELEMENT list  (t+|lt+)>
> <!ELEMENT lt    (t|list)+>
> <!ATTLIST lt
>           hangText    %ATEXT;            #IMPLIED>
> 
> Single-paragraph lists could still use <list><t>... for backwards
> compatability, new lists would be formatted with <lt>..</lt> wrappers
> around each item:
> <list><lt><t/><t/></lt><lt><t/></lt></list>?
> 
> (A list should only be allowed to have t+ or lt+, not a mixture,
>  to avoid confusion (always wrap or never wrap))

Sounds good to me.

Best regards, Julian