On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 6:44 PM Tim Wicinski <[email protected]> wrote:
> (this is really for Murray) > > On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 6:25 PM Murray S. Kucherawy <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> Looks good to me where it is. I would add "(PSL)", introducing the >> acronym, right after its first use if we decide to leave it there. >> >> A formatting thing to take care of at some point: Anyplace you refer to >> DMARC, the protocol, just have it as "DMARC" (e.g., "not exempt from DMARC >> policy"); anyplace you refer to DMARC, the specification (e.g., "Section >> a.b.c of DMARC" or similar), it should be the <xref target="..."> ... >> </xref> sorta deal so that it pops out as a reference. >> >> > So the xref for RFC7489 were created of this form: > > <xref target="RFC7489">DMARC</xref> > > and submitted into the submission system, the HTML document will have this > look: > > > DMARC [RFC7489] (Link is mapped to [RFC7489]) > > and the HTML is > > [<a href="./rfc7489" title=""Domain-based Message Authentication, > Reporting, and Conformance (DMARC)"">RFC7489</a>]However, when I run > xml2rfc (v3.5.0) locally the > > > However, when I run xml2rfc (v3.5.0) locally, the HTML shows the text "DMARC" > as a link > > and the HTML is > > <a href="#RFC7489" class="xref">DMARC</a> > > > So this makes my brain hurt. I'm going to revisit this in the morning. > For the ones that should actually be document references, try just <xref target="RFC7489"/>. -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
