On 07.05.2011 04:19, John C Klensin wrote:
... No. If you look at 4409, you will see several citations, of which one example is "[SMTP-MTA]". In 4409, the corresponding reference is: Postel... RFC 821... Partridge... RFC 974... Braden... RFC 1123... Klensin... RFC 2821... i.e., "compound references" in the sense that one anchor identifies a list of RFCs. While 4409 doesn't use it, exactly the same problem arises if one chooses to cite an STD or BCP number that identifies multiple RFCs. That is the construction to which I claim that xml2rfc is hostile -=the only elegant way to do it in the current design would be <reference anchor="SMTP-MTA"> <reference>...Postel... RFC 821...</reference> <reference>...Partridge... RFC 974...</reference> <reference>...Braden... RFC 1123...</reference> <reference>...Klensin... RFC 2821...</reference> </reference>And neither nested reference elements nor reference elements without anchors are permitted by the DTD. ...
If this is used a lot, we should consider adding it. Is it?
The example you cite above is one of multiple citations at the same point rather than a single compound citation.. And, indeed, most style manuals (along with 4409) prefer "[SMTP-MTA, ESMTP]" to "[SMTP-MTA][ESMTP]". FWIW, I think the tools should help us get thing right rather than forcing us to do things that are wrong. But so it goes.
You can do this with xmlrfc when using the tools from rfc2629.xslt as preprocessor, see, for example, <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2629xslt/testcase.html#rfc.section.5.11>.
Finally, I think somewhere else I saw discussion about putting additional information into references... There's the <annotation> element for that.
Best regards, Julian _______________________________________________ yam mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam
