On 4/20/2011 1:18 PM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
...

2. RFC XML has changed. It seem like
xml.resource.org has a new xml compiler. I had a lot of trouble in compiling my
existing xml files. I am OK with improving RFC XML but why not keep upward
compatibility?

An optional strict checker was added to the online xml2rfc web page, turned on by default.


You then have two choices:

1) Fix your XML. If your XML file fails the strict checker, then it was not valid according to the xml2rfc DTD grammar. The error message will tell you what you did wrong, using a regular expression to describe what is expected (which may be rather cryptic). For example, here are a few of the messages you might see:

[Error] INPUT:86:9: The content of element type "list" is incomplete, it must match "(t)+".

Your <list> did not include any <t> tags.

[Error] INPUT:175:11: The content of element type "t" must match "(list|figure|xref|eref|iref|cref|spanx|vspace)".

Inside a <t> tag, you may only have one of the tags listed -- any other tag will be an error.

[Error] INPUT:193:11: The content of element type "section" must match "((t|figure|texttable|iref)*,section*)".

Inside a <section> tag, you can have zero or more <t>, <figure>, <texttable> or <iref> tags, followed by zero or more <section> tags.

The numbers indicate the line and column number where the error was noticed, but that number is figured out after include and reference processing has been performed. So it may not match exactly the line numbering in your file, but should be close.

2) Turn off the strict checking. In the web form, on the line that says Checking, instead of picking Strict choose Fast.

Note that there is currently an effort to rewrite the xml2rfc processor that does the actual processing behind the scenes. One of the requirements for this effort was that it pay strict attention to the DTD, exactly like the Strict Checking does.

Hope this helps.

    Tony Hansen
    t...@att.om
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to