We have been stuck on a number of grammar bugs in RFCXMLv3 for a long while. For a while, Henrik just fixed them [0], but these days the bugs typically linger in the xml2rfc repo as issues on which no progress can be made, e.g. #570 [1].
Over in the xml2rfc repo, I just suggested this [2]: > The best way to handle this probably is to generate a fixed grammar (e.g., > here, allowing all block-level elements in all places where block-level > elements are allowed), agree this as an RPC input after soliciting community > feedback and building a prototype implementation in xml2rfc, get a nod from > RSWG, and release the xml2rfc update. Since this is front-loaded with technical work (propose a fixed grammar, implement it in xml2rfc), it would probably be useful to get some assent from RSWG now that this is indeed a process that is conducive to progress. Grüße, Carsten [0]: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-levkowetz-xml2rfc-v3-implementation-notes-13.html#section-5.4 [1]: https://github.com/ietf-tools/xml2rfc/issues/570 [2]: https://github.com/ietf-tools/xml2rfc/issues/570#issuecomment-2853255045 -- rswg mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
