> Hi -
> > From: "Julian Reschke" <[email protected]>
> > To: "Randy Presuhn" <[email protected]>
> > Cc: "IETF Discussion Mailing List" <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 10:13 AM
> > Subject: Re: Automatically updated Table of Contents with Nroff
> ...
> > Point is: nroff and xml2rfc share the advantage that they are simple
> > text based formats, which can be put under version control, and
> > collaborative editing/change control just works. Missing features can
> > simply implemented using automated pre- or post-processing stages.
> ...
> With respect to boilerplate, xml2rfc lacks this advantage.
> *It* generates the boilerplate; the user has no way of knowing whether
> the option present in the source file will result in the same output
> text today as it did yesterday.
I've been using xml2fc extensively since it came out, and I've *never* seen a
case where the boilerplate changed for a given combination of ipr setting and
date. Moreover, I would regard any such change as a bug, not a feature.
> From a configuration management /
> revision control perspective, this is highly undesirable.
it would be if it happened. AFAIK it does not.
> It would be
> much better to be able to "#include" a versioned source file for
> those bits.
I strongly disagree. An *overwhelming* advantage of xml2rfc is that it takes
care of boilerplate and I rarely if ever have to think about it, much less
having to arrange for a set of include files to be available. Blech on that.
Ned
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
