Re: Last Call: 'Proposed Experiment: Normative Format in Addition to ASCII Text' to Experimental RFC (draft-ash-alt-formats)

[Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer at nic.fr>]

On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 09:01:22AM -0700,
 Joe Touch <touch at ISI.EDU> wrote 
 a message of 34 lines which said:

> > IMHO, IETF should always publish the "source" of its documents
> > (the current RFC process is far from perfect in that respect).
> 
> Which source

The source. The author certainly knows it (yes, I'm aware that the RFC
editor performs changes which are not backported in the author's copy,
a really annoying thing; that's why I said the current process is
bad).

> (XML2RFC is only one; some use troff, and others use Word, among
> others)

Sure. This is not a problem for me. I just want to see the source, as
the author saw it. 

> Why would inter-source conversion be more useful than cut-and-paste?

I don't have experience with MS-Word but (re)generating the RFC 2629
source from the ASCII version is a big pain (while there are automatic
converters, for instance from *roff to XML and, of course, from one
XML to the other).

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