Hi All, Thank you for the updated XML file. We have updated the other document files accordingly.
Please note that that xml2rfc v3.30.0 <https://github.com/ietf-tools/xml2rfc/releases/tag/v3.30.0> has been released, and the misalignment issue in the PDF output of both 9787 and 9788 is now fixed! The files have been posted here (please refresh): https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9788.xml https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9788.txt https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9788.html https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9788.pdf The relevant diff files have been posted here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9788-diff.html (comprehensive diff) https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9788-auth48diff.html (AUTH48 changes) https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9788-auth48rfcdiff.html (AUTH48 changes side by side) https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9788-lastdiff.html (last version to this one) https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9788-lastrfcdiff.html (rfcdiff between last version and this) Once we receive approvals from Bernie and Roman (AD), we will move this document forward in the publication process. Please see the AUTH48 status page for this document here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9788 Thank you, RFC Editor/ap > On Jul 16, 2025, at 3:18 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <d...@fifthhorseman.net> > wrote: > > Hi RFC editor-- > > On Wed 2025-07-16 10:06:52 -0700, Alanna Paloma wrote: >> [dkg wrote:] >>> …split "message/rfc822" across two lines… >> >> ) We have fixed this issue. > > Thanks for this fix, and for the other punctuation and grammar fixes. > >> ) As the text seems understandable and clear enough to readers as-is, >> we defer to your preference if you would like “send”/“compose” and >> “receive”/“render” to be made more consistent throughout the >> document. Since you already made those updates in another XML file, we >> can easily update the other document files to match if you do choose >> to make these changes. > > Understood. The authors discussed this and i think we collectively lean > toward trying to normalize the terms, as long as it isn't too much pain > for the the RFC editor process. > >> ) As DKG’s PR to add Noto Sans Mono >> (https://github.com/ietf-tools/xml2rfc/pull/1261) has been merged into >> main, we are awaiting the next release of xml2rfc, which will likely >> be later this week. To be consistent with 9787, please send us and >> updated XML with BOX DRAWINGS. > > Understood. > > The attached XML updates the MIME diagrams with BOX DRAWINGS, and makes > the terminology more consistently use "Composing" and "Rendering" > instead of "Sending" and "Receiving". Where the latter terms remain in > the draft, they are really used specifically to talk about transport, as > opposed to message structure. > > Please let us know if there are any problems with this update! > > If you would prefer a BOX DRAWINGS update without the > composing/rendering changes, i can also supply that instead. > > Regards, > > --dkg > > <rfc9788.xml>
-- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
