Hi all,
On 4/24/25 1:52 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
Paul Hoffman <paul.hoff...@vpnc.org> wrote:
> This thread has become very author-hostile. "You are forced to deal
> with changes that are being made to match some people's preferred
> viewing of your source material."
That's exactly what the RPC does today.
[JM] I'm not sure what this statement is referring to.
The RPC currently does not run any tidy scripts on the XML; that is, we
are not broadly reformatting XML source. We do occasionally reflow the
text in a paragraph after some copy editing (M-q in emacs), but we are
discussing when/if we should do that in light of this conversation. When
we reformat bulleted lists to definition lists, we do move text. For
example:
<li>Stuff - Some definition</li>
Changes to:
<dt>Stuff</dt>
<dd>Some definition</dd>
During AUTH48, if an author suggests an updated passage, we will copy
and paste that into the XML file rather than update the sentence word by
word. While this approach may cause noisy modifications to whitespace
and line breaks, it also minimizes errors.
We understand that authors who work in markdown view diffs of the source
files (like in GitHub) more often than diffs of the output (e.g., the
rfcdiff files provided by the RPC and datatracker), and that GitHub diff
highlights whitespace and line break changes, whereas rfcdiff tries to
minimize them. We will work on processes that minimize that sort of noise.
Best regards,
Jean
If the author hasn't used NSNL, then ANY diff the RPC produces is going to be
harder to view. In order to minimize that, they could do NSNL in their
editing. Whether or not they reformat EVERYTHING is another question.
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list -- rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
To unsubscribe send an email to rfc-interest-le...@rfc-editor.org
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list -- rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
To unsubscribe send an email to rfc-interest-le...@rfc-editor.org
