Kent Watsen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Now that IETF has officially moved to XML as the sole format > > > > I'm not sure what you mean, can you provide a pointer? AFAICT, the > > latest published RFC is still only available as txt and pdf. > > I meant that XML is the sole *input* format, per RFC 7990, but you're > right about the XML not currently being easily accessed. I've signed > up for the IETF 104 CodeSprint to fix this, as well as to introduce > folding support into the publishing process. > > > >> No, there are cases where this fails. We went thru this before. > > > > Only if you have data with > 69 spaces in a row that needs to be > > preserved. > > More generally, anytime the fold occurs where space characters > follow.
No, b/c you wouldn't fold there. > But why are you arguing for this? - the double-backslash approach > works great for when indents are desired. Let's agree that it works :) I'm arguing that *if* we are to define two solutions, we should use this one. (And as I explained, my preference is this one over the double-backslash solution, but I accept the WG consensus for the double-backslash solution) > My interest in this thread was/is only to cover the common case > when there are no indents, and the continuation line always begins > on column 1, in which case the 2nd backslash is unneeded and > somewhat counterintuitive. But your continuation line will not start at column 1 (since artwork is indented with 3 spaces by default). So this solution doesn't really work. /martin _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
