Er, if you're going to do that, why don't you just
accept any source format?
Mike
Rosen, Brian writes:
> I proposed allowing XML format of Internet Drafts be made available
> if they exist. Period.
>
> I specifically DO NOT propose changing the RFC process in any way.
> I specifically DO NOT propose anything but an OPTIONAL submission
> of xml; ASCII text must always be submitted, as it is now.
> If you have xml, send it, and we'll post it. That's it.
> I think I have consistently argued against expanding this
> proposal.
>
> Yeah, I know about camel's noses, but I agree with John that the
> proposal useful and harmless.
>
> Brian
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Vernon Schryver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 6:51 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: A modest proposal - allow the ID repository to hold xml
> >
> >
> > > From: John C Klensin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > ...
> > > (1) As an/the authoritative format, plain ASCII text, plus
> > > whatever additional format(s) the RFC Editor decides to permit
> > > to support drawings, etc., should almost certainly remain the
> > > target for the reasons you identify. ...
> >
> > > (2) If a group of people, such as a WG, are collaborating on the
> > > development of a document, having the working format (whatever
> > > it is) readily available would seem to be an advantage. This
> > > should not make that format authoritative, or attach any special
> > > importance or validation to it relative to other formats.
> >
> > That sounds fine or at least tolerable.
> >
> > > Now I think that all that Brian proposed originally was that the
> > > XML format of Internet Drafts be made available when it happened
> > > to exist. Even though that might be letting the proverbial
> > > camel's nose into the tent, it strikes me as basically harmless
> > > and probably useful.
> >
> > yes.
> >
> > > Did I misunderstand him? Do we disagree about part of the above
> > > and, if so, which part?
> >
> > My possibly mistaken impression of Brian's most recent position is
> > that he would support XML for the official documents. Regardless of
> > his position, other people have clearly come out in favor XML for the
> > official format. The frequently mentioned hyperlinks among documents
> > such as for authors would be rather boring if the links are only among
> > documents that expire after 6 months. More powerful searching among
> > I-Ds would be useful, but the real power would be searching among
> > RFCs. Several people have written about converting old RFCs to XML.
> >
> >
> > Vernon Schryver [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > This message was passed through
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED], which is a sublist of
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Not all messages are passed. Decisions on what
> > to pass are made solely by Raffaele D'Albenzio.
> >
>
>
