Re: xml2rfc improvements (was: Re: Image attachments to ASCII RFCs)

[Dave Cridland <dave at cridland.net>]

On Tue Jun 20 19:50:36 2006, John C Klensin wrote:
> As a more general observation, the whole XML2RFC family of tools
> seem to have been designed and optimized for producing RFCs.  To
> the extent to which I have complaints personally (and I have few
> -- I'm generally quite happy with it) it is because, while the
> RFC Editor produces RFCs, most of us spend most of our time
> producing and revising I-Ds.  It is much better now than it was
> when the project got started, but, IMO, the places where it
> comes up short are in tools for working collaboratively, and
> developing and tracking changes, on a document that is a work in
> progress rather that one at the last pre-publication stages.

I use a version control system (specifically subversion) and tools 
such as meld - http://meld.sf.net/ - for handling that case. What 
changes is meld's job using a diff between revisions, why is from the 
log entry.

Between them, I find them a sufficiently close fit that I'm not 
looking for anything better.

I specifically don't think that trying to emulate version control 
features in a document format is worth spending effort on.

Of course, if I could convince everyone I co-edit/co-author with to 
use the version control system, I'd be even happier, but it works 
okay even if I proxy their changes in.

Dave.
--
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave at cridland.net - xmpp:dwd at jabber.org
 - acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
 - http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade

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