Kent Watsen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > But note that figures in RFCs are normally indented with 3 spaces > > (they _can_ be outdented, if the lines are long enough). > > > The days of scraping from plain-text RFCs are over [1]. Extracting, > if needed at all, should be from the XML, where there are no such > issues. Extracting from the plain-text output makes about as much > sense as extracting from the HTML or PDF outputs.
I am confused. Are you saying that the unfolding algorithm only is supposed to work on data extracted from the XML version of the I-D or RFC? If so, I think this needs to be clarified in the draft. > Lossless extractions are critical for formal verifications (e.g., > doctor reviews, shepherd reviews, AUTH48 reviews). Both the > double-backslash approach we currently have, and the single-backslash > approach we had originally (where the continuation-line begins on > column 1, as it has been in programming languages for decades) provide > lossless extractions. .... as does the single-backslash with leading space removal. /martin > > The double-backslash approach is ideal for when pretty-indents are > desired. The single-backslash approach is ideal for when the > pretty-indents are not needed. Both are completely valid and useful. > My contention is that we unnecessarily threw out one when reaching for > the other. > > [1] https://pypi.org/project/xiax > > Kent _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
