Re: Diagrams (Was RFCs should be distributed in XML)

[Dave Crocker <dhc2 at dcrocker.net>]

> >      I understand the
> > difficulty of machine parsing, but wouldn't an XML format with human
> > oriented output in PDF be nice?  (I suppose I'm asking whether
> > there's some historical flamewar over this that I managed never to
> > look at, in which case I'll just keep my mouth shut.)
> There is. Lets not reopen the format flame war. However,
> just for the record we DO have .pdf as a format that you
> can submit Internet Drafts and as something that you
> also get from the RFC Editor. 


Folks might want to take a look at the latest xml2rfc capabilities.  See 
<http://xml.resource.org/>.  Besides making it far easier to include the 
correct boilerplate, it has the option of including pretty graphics for the 
PDF version, while using the ASCII form for the ASCII version.

This seems like a rather good transition mechanism, to see whether we really 
want/need to move away from ASCII.  (After all, the dual-stack model for 
transition is a time-honored methodology...)

d/
--

Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
<http://bbiw.net>

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf