From ahagens@amsl.com Fri Jun 3 13:52:40 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE602E07C7 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 13:52:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8PuV6Rwy31q6 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 13:52:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (mail.amsl.com [64.170.98.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72C04E0670 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 13:52:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c1a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A7311C3843A; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 13:52:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c1a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c1a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vwO1zrLqX7Et; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 13:52:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc2.home (pool-72-66-107-92.washdc.fios.verizon.net [72.66.107.92]) by c1a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CFB681C38159; Fri, 3 Jun 2011 13:52:39 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Alice Hagens In-Reply-To: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 16:52:38 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> To: Julian Reschke X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 20:52:41 -0000 On May 25, 2011, at 3:10 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2011-05-24 23:52, Alice Hagens wrote: >> Julian wrote: >>> Alice, can this be clarified at this point? Alternatively, could you = state how *you* read it, and whether the production center would accept = texts where the front page only has a subset of the names mentioned in = the back section? >>=20 >> Per discussion with the Acting RSE, we recommend that documents have = a one-to-one mapping of names on the front page to names in the authors' = addresses; however, it not a MUST. In practice, we do not change = documents to have a one-to-one mapping. As mentioned, = http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy.html#policy.authlist will remain in = place until a change is determined by a new RFC Series Editor. >=20 > When this is the case, what's the set of authors added to the RFC = database entry? The authors that are listed in the first-page header. >=20 >> Thomas correctly pointed out a case where some RFCs do not have a = one-to-one mapping: >=20 > Which? We don't keep a list of RFCs, but an example is RFC 5286 (of the case = where editors are listed on the first page, but editors and additional = authors are listed in "Authors' Addresses"). Thank you. Alice for the RFC Production Center >=20 >>> (e.g. cases where only editors are on front page, but every author = in the "Authors' Addresses" section). >>=20 >> To reiterate, we suggest that the tool be flexible -- allow authors = to create output as desired. >> ... >=20 > Best regards, Julian >=20 On May 25, 2011, at 3:10 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2011-05-24 23:52, Alice Hagens wrote: >> Julian wrote: >>> Alice, can this be clarified at this point? Alternatively, could you = state how *you* read it, and whether the production center would accept = texts where the front page only has a subset of the names mentioned in = the back section? >>=20 >> Per discussion with the Acting RSE, we recommend that documents have = a one-to-one mapping of names on the front page to names in the authors' = addresses; however, it not a MUST. In practice, we do not change = documents to have a one-to-one mapping. As mentioned, = http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy.html#policy.authlist will remain in = place until a change is determined by a new RFC Series Editor. >=20 > When this is the case, what's the set of authors added to the RFC = database entry? >=20 >> Thomas correctly pointed out a case where some RFCs do not have a = one-to-one mapping: >=20 > Which? >=20 >>> (e.g. cases where only editors are on front page, but every author = in the "Authors' Addresses" section). >>=20 >> To reiterate, we suggest that the tool be flexible -- allow authors = to create output as desired. >> ... >=20 > Best regards, Julian >=20 From john+xml@jck.com Sat Jun 4 14:34:00 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D060E21F84CB for ; Sat, 4 Jun 2011 14:34:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eXiGKz2rRK-B for ; Sat, 4 Jun 2011 14:34:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EA7721F84CA for ; Sat, 4 Jun 2011 14:34:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=localhost) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1QSyTk-000N05-B4; Sat, 04 Jun 2011 17:33:56 -0400 Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2011 17:33:55 -0400 From: John C Klensin To: Alice Hagens , Julian Reschke Message-ID: <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> In-Reply-To: References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2011 21:34:00 -0000 --On Friday, June 03, 2011 16:52 -0400 Alice Hagens wrote: >... >>> Per discussion with the Acting RSE, we recommend that >>> documents have a one-to-one mapping of names on the front >>> page to names in the authors' addresses; however, it not a >>> MUST. In practice, we do not change documents to have a >>> one-to-one mapping. As mentioned, >>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy.html#policy.authlist will >>> remain in place until a change is determined by a new RFC >>> Series Editor. >> >> When this is the case, what's the set of authors added to the >> RFC database entry? > > The authors that are listed in the first-page header. >... While I think flexibility in the xml2rfc tool is fine, I note that having a contact information ("Authors' Addresses") list that is different from the first-page list puts us on a slippery slope vis-a-vis the Contributor Section and also with the IPR status and assumptions about the author list (whatever list that actually becomes). If we are serious about not making policy changes, or significant policy decisions, until we have a "permanent" RSE in place, this should go on that "deferred" list. If we are not serious, I think several of us have candidate lists of far more significant issues to be addressed. john From julian.reschke@gmx.de Sun Jun 5 03:16:19 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C31E21F84D9 for ; Sun, 5 Jun 2011 03:16:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vK36vKgifqyz for ; Sun, 5 Jun 2011 03:16:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 1661E21F84D8 for ; Sun, 5 Jun 2011 03:16:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 05 Jun 2011 10:16:13 -0000 Received: from p508FB9F3.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.36]) [80.143.185.243] by mail.gmx.net (mp014) with SMTP; 05 Jun 2011 12:16:13 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/W0lNS8APWwiA1IS4hX7QcTqD+mLKPrnSRdzFKg8 /Ki1nHrTMWGHF8 Message-ID: <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2011 12:15:57 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John C Klensin References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> In-Reply-To: <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2011 10:16:19 -0000 On 2011-06-04 23:33, John C Klensin wrote: > > > --On Friday, June 03, 2011 16:52 -0400 Alice Hagens > wrote: > >> ... >>>> Per discussion with the Acting RSE, we recommend that >>>> documents have a one-to-one mapping of names on the front >>>> page to names in the authors' addresses; however, it not a >>>> MUST. In practice, we do not change documents to have a >>>> one-to-one mapping. As mentioned, >>>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy.html#policy.authlist will >>>> remain in place until a change is determined by a new RFC >>>> Series Editor. >>> >>> When this is the case, what's the set of authors added to the >>> RFC database entry? >> >> The authors that are listed in the first-page header. >> ... > > While I think flexibility in the xml2rfc tool is fine, I note > that having a contact information ("Authors' Addresses") list > that is different from the first-page list puts us on a slippery > slope vis-a-vis the Contributor Section and also with the IPR > status and assumptions about the author list (whatever list that > actually becomes). If we are serious about not making policy > changes, or significant policy decisions, until we have a > "permanent" RSE in place, this should go on that "deferred" > list. If we are not serious, I think several of us have > candidate lists of far more significant issues to be addressed. > > john +1 My biggest concern here is that people might believe that a contact not listed on the front page can continue to be considered an "author". This is not the case right now, ad thus it would be very confusing to add xml2rfc features to get that result. If* we believe that we'll keep the authors/contributors distinction, we should look into supporting *that* better in xml2rfc. Best regards, Julian From dhc2@dcrocker.net Sun Jun 5 10:09:05 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98AA611E8090 for ; Sun, 5 Jun 2011 10:09:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DlWdiEEDyX3X for ; Sun, 5 Jun 2011 10:09:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC70511E8085 for ; Sun, 5 Jun 2011 10:09:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.8] (adsl-67-127-56-68.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.127.56.68]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p55H8wgk006319 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 5 Jun 2011 10:09:04 -0700 Message-ID: <4DEBB81F.8010604@dcrocker.net> Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2011 10:08:47 -0700 From: Dave CROCKER Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: RFC Editor References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Sun, 05 Jun 2011 10:09:04 -0700 (PDT) Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2011 17:09:05 -0000 On 6/3/2011 1:52 PM, Alice Hagens wrote: > On May 25, 2011, at 3:10 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > >> On 2011-05-24 23:52, Alice Hagens wrote: >>> Julian wrote: >>> Per discussion with the Acting RSE, we recommend that documents have a >>> one-to-one mapping of names on the front page to names in the authors' >>> addresses; however, it not a MUST. ... > We don't keep a list of RFCs, but an example is RFC 5286 (of the case where > editors are listed on the first page, but editors and additional authors are > listed in "Authors' Addresses"). Folks, I'm going to suggest that this really needs to be a MUST, both for straightforward simplicity of the model, as well as for consonance with IETF culture. First, a more relaxed rule makes tools more complicated, as demonstrated by the xml2rfc issue that started this thread. We need to careful that our natural inclination to be permissive about how things are done does not wind up creating excessive burden on those maintaining the IETF infrastructure. It's permissive to some authors, but it's a hassle on the support staff. (There are all sorts of comparisons one might make, here, to the tradeoffs that apply to the way protocols should be specified and implemented, but beyond citing the opportunity, I won't pursue it...) Second, the primary purpose of listing authors on an RFC is to distinguish the folks with physical responsibility for assembling the document. In some cases, this is also the set of folk who were the principal creative contributors to the content, such as for most documents submitted through the Independent Stream, and for IETF efforts that represent the fine-tuning of a core group's original creativity. Most IETF work is committee work. The product is the product of the committee. The 'authors' have done the documentation work and typically contribute to semantic creativity, but only as part of the team. The IETF distinguishes two levels of contribution: author/editor vs. 'team', whether the team is a working group or something less formal. The team is cited in Acknowledgements. To provide for a distinction between the front page author list and the later author contact set is to define a new class of contributor. The simple, two-level arrangement has worked well for forty years. If it needs to be modified and made more complex, the rationale needs to be compelling. So, what is the compelling IETF community need for this? Absent that compelling need, we need to refrain from burdening the operations side of the IETF with supporting this added bit of complexity that has no apparent functional benefit for the IETF. And by the way, let's note that none of this results in creating a barrier to the detailed citation of special or additional contributors. There are no restrictions to the content of an Acknowledgments section, nor is there a restriction against having a separate section designed to provide a set of contact information that is parallel to Authors, but refersg to some other, relevant principals. Neither of these alternatives requires any changes to the tools. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From nico@cryptonector.com Mon Jun 6 03:37:03 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25C1911E80F5 for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 03:37:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DiwHzMv6LNoc for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 03:37:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a36.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcbef.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.145]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98C8D11E80F4 for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 03:37:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a36.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a36.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6082177806E for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 03:37:02 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cryptonector.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc: content-type; q=dns; s=cryptonector.com; b=SsT6/Vj/u8UCWYi8hivA0 i7V6LCU694M7b3c6t7rNO8qOoATmq1QxXdduxL2YLIDCT4LhPssNzIoPQ0qt1WAK a1f5b7rWKuivsMi6kBZQNV7paK2zB5dvrltUDVlS99H0GGR6qA2ogIou/vId9E9Y qtgRoFwswEwrOUi2ziLH/M= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type; s=cryptonector.com; bh=sYGdn2DQA/mpEOyuZB/N 2yR2Vas=; b=nk4wxelj6mAcglo0lj7ITvqDF8rQGomjpeWYBbMPyYYhmWSu0n3x XyrObdjt0D6Gc9Pr5FoqdceEG4xnwx0v1ml97d6as75XM8zDB/P1Jdf6Vppbttav COkMhfKfvOuUmaq/BvtdFHjUEpO3nmfoOLLMrB7odN04QFr+SkMGyF4= Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a36.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 33E7E778057 for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 03:37:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vws12 with SMTP id 12so3360709vws.31 for ; Mon, 06 Jun 2011 03:37:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.74.68 with SMTP id r4mr2712375vdv.221.1307356621398; Mon, 06 Jun 2011 03:37:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.112.163 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 03:37:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2011 05:37:00 -0500 Message-ID: From: Nico Williams To: Julian Reschke Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, John C Klensin , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 10:37:03 -0000 On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 5:15 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > My biggest concern here is that people might believe that a contact not > listed on the front page can continue to be considered an "author". This is > not the case right now, ad thus it would be very confusing to add xml2rfc > features to get that result. Why is that a problem? Why would a contact not listed on the front page but listed in the back not be useful to contact? The RFC-Editor never said that the distinction between front- and back-page author listing would relate to which is appropriate to contact. (Also, quite frankly, contact information really does expire eventually. Authors drop off and even move on to other careers, and eventually we all pass away. So yours is an odd concern for that reason also.) > If* we believe that we'll keep the authors/contributors distinction, we > should look into supporting *that* better in xml2rfc. We should first ask the RFC-Editor to reconsider their policy. If they continue to assert it, why should the tools team refuse to help them implement it? (One answer is that the tools team serves the IETF, not the RFC-Editor, but that would be a short-sighted view IMO.) Nico -- From nico@cryptonector.com Mon Jun 6 03:40:00 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81F5011E80F4 for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 03:40:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZGZuUBi2uv2Y for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 03:39:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a70.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcbef.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.145]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B36E811E808C for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 03:39:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a70.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a70.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A81F768059 for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 03:39:59 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cryptonector.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s= cryptonector.com; b=qtkBdxjL+akL610tTWyNis5HnXgq/7wQ3EixhjS9G6cS G1klKzCf9Abdf20rchHfdoW7tP8dx7fug7+TVggIvFv96GUXosatCUNkB1fPcFTw Olm5/UcQaHNWMI4OWX54Tcrat7rVmfbh0pgPdfRoReh3JGJqxMg13IKe9FLVqtI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= cryptonector.com; bh=259q2eDSxKK63uQDBU73L0Wkg2w=; b=lVD02tx2qc3 k7vzWy3nfMCehR8qc50POCJnAv1zRnoFA3EpCecJzelB+SzK8LUcwjdFMoB9GLvc 7TqmCVAo2LA1lPf4u8uSMmMoVsCsXK6FdiY53BIG+PG8LtZS+rO8ivQ3zRR73NBa ToXuh96PWTj/6O8qEEph7mQGngR0u1hQ= Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a70.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6809C768058 for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 03:39:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vxg33 with SMTP id 33so3361919vxg.31 for ; Mon, 06 Jun 2011 03:39:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.96.167 with SMTP id dt7mr3590486vdb.181.1307356798657; Mon, 06 Jun 2011 03:39:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.112.163 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 03:39:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DEBB81F.8010604@dcrocker.net> References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <4DEBB81F.8010604@dcrocker.net> Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2011 05:39:58 -0500 Message-ID: From: Nico Williams To: dcrocker@bbiw.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 10:40:00 -0000 On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote: > I'm going to suggest that this really needs to be a MUST, both for > straightforward simplicity of the model, as well as for consonance with I= ETF > culture. > > First, a more relaxed rule makes tools more complicated, as demonstrated = by > the xml2rfc issue that started this thread. =C2=A0We need to careful that= our Demonstrated by...? Three of us saying "no". The RFC-Editor, meanwhile, has a policy that _they_ set and enforce. Even the IESG might be unable to force the RFC-Editor to do otherwise, IIUC anyways. The RFC-Editor's policy on this is quite sensible: they want to avoid docs with lots of authors just to please employers, but they want flexibility in case there really are some docs with large numbers of actual authors. If they have real examples where a document truly had many actual authors, then that should suffice for us to let them have their policy, no? If not then we can always say: wait until you do. But at the very least this seems like the wrong forum to debate the RFC-Editor's policies. > natural inclination to be permissive about how things are done does not w= ind > up creating excessive burden on those maintaining the IETF infrastructure= . I suppose if you might be afraid of death by a thousand cuts. But there's no evidence that xml2rfc is suffering from that. Perhaps the larger tools team is suffering from a thousand cuts in other tools, but not this one. Or at least not visibly. In any case, the maintainers have not made that argument. > To provide for a distinction between the front page author list and the > later author contact set is to define a new class of contributor. =C2=A0T= he > simple, two-level arrangement has worked well for forty years. =C2=A0If i= t needs > to be modified and made more complex, the rationale needs to be compellin= g. Not really. The front-page/back-page distinction is one dictated by space availability, nothing else. One alternative might be to list only "Various" on the front page when there's more authors than would fit on the front page, then there would be no question of creating a new type of author. > So, what is the compelling IETF community need for this? =C2=A0Absent tha= t > compelling need, we need to refrain from burdening the operations side of > the IETF with supporting this added bit of complexity that has no apparen= t > functional benefit for the IETF. This tool (xml2rfc) already has functionality that the neither the IETF nor the RFC-Editor need. That doesn't excuse adding more such functionality, certainly, but here we have the RFC-Editor asking for it, so that argument wouldn't wash. (Nor would I suggest removing functionality that the IETF doesn't need. I have, for example, made use of xml2rfcs private memo functionality and thus I appreciate it's being there.) Nico -- From julian.reschke@gmx.de Mon Jun 6 03:48:39 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4D4711E8115 for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 03:48:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 60vBklBXdruN for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 03:48:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 0BC2911E80ED for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 03:48:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 06 Jun 2011 10:48:37 -0000 Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.140]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp071) with SMTP; 06 Jun 2011 12:48:37 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/vKdl26KHvQdGbY4bNKrkz74dl3j+byS6svMMliy zuISgspi2pe9w7 Message-ID: <4DECB083.7060208@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 12:48:35 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nico Williams References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, John C Klensin , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 10:48:40 -0000 On 2011-06-06 12:37, Nico Williams wrote: > On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 5:15 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: >> My biggest concern here is that people might believe that a contact not >> listed on the front page can continue to be considered an "author". This is >> not the case right now, ad thus it would be very confusing to add xml2rfc >> features to get that result. > > Why is that a problem? Why would a contact not listed on the front > page but listed in the back not be useful to contact? The RFC-Editor I didn't say that. Please re-read what I said. > never said that the distinction between front- and back-page author > listing would relate to which is appropriate to contact. (Also, quite > frankly, contact information really does expire eventually. Authors > drop off and even move on to other careers, and eventually we all pass > away. So yours is an odd concern for that reason also.) Yes. >> If* we believe that we'll keep the authors/contributors distinction, we >> should look into supporting *that* better in xml2rfc. > > We should first ask the RFC-Editor to reconsider their policy. If > they continue to assert it, why should the tools team refuse to help > them implement it? (One answer is that the tools team serves the > IETF, not the RFC-Editor, but that would be a short-sighted view IMO.) > ... The *documented* policy is that there are authors and contributors, and the authors are listed on the front page. Alice said that they do not *enforce* this, thus allow the authors section to include contacts not on the front page. But, as it was jsut clarified, this doesn't *make* those contacts authors (only the persons on the front page are considered authors for the purpose of AUTH48, RFC database, and citations). So what's the advantage to have this confusion, instead of putting this information into the "Contributors" section? Best regards, Julian From nico@cryptonector.com Mon Jun 6 04:08:49 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22E7611E80F8 for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 04:08:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 46WG4IZVhlKB for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 04:08:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a30.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcahe.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.74]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F14411E80D6 for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 04:08:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a30.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a30.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08D3621DE71 for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 04:08:48 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cryptonector.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc: content-type; q=dns; s=cryptonector.com; b=QCIgnbhLOt7rjLmET3AaX ZgEYzcqaP/iEMzpWMwbMjB6bMFpJ7QSxcFoIFi4J2irAmlOoe2VTeFgqhMIQL1j5 vX5zxVQeaLWKszpS0KHbYNB1AH08hHPNf/v/nNuv1U0Hfnff9GwjbSga/EOxqGnC /rr5JsNPprw7sxr5C8ByBg= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type; s=cryptonector.com; bh=aP/bPIdejRb1XW/BdLPl L9GID/w=; b=qfdX1yASlh2vmcVlbEb1P2/9JTifZaaXYX6+z05LF3siRxBaQaPC Kd/yLNRekn946bh11g2iaFxHxvvBnlDpjLim4guEuU+8Ab5reGhk8HHab8iKCKwH kBotn6hbgxl1VLs9NkYxNSmuCywvxTfJolELcT7Pt7+kBu4zi2Vo5go= Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a30.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B3B4F21DE6F for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 04:08:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vws12 with SMTP id 12so3380686vws.31 for ; Mon, 06 Jun 2011 04:08:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.65.231 with SMTP id a7mr2395488vdt.61.1307358527146; Mon, 06 Jun 2011 04:08:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.112.163 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 04:08:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DECB083.7060208@gmx.de> References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DECB083.7060208@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2011 06:08:47 -0500 Message-ID: From: Nico Williams To: Julian Reschke Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, John C Klensin , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 11:08:49 -0000 On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > The *documented* policy is that there are authors and contributors, and the > authors are listed on the front page. Not so. The policy quite clearly does NOT say that. We've been over this. You refuse to accept the plain English language meaning of the policy. Granted, a cursory reading might differ from a careful one, but that's not important. > Alice said that they do not *enforce* this, thus allow the authors section > to include contacts not on the front page. But, as it was jsut clarified, > this doesn't *make* those contacts authors (only the persons on the front > page are considered authors for the purpose of AUTH48, RFC database, and > citations). I can't find where she said that. > So what's the advantage to have this confusion, instead of putting this > information into the "Contributors" section? What's confusing? Nico -- From julian.reschke@gmx.de Mon Jun 6 04:52:02 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C35011E80F8 for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 04:52:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QAxGduLnYicL for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 04:52:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 6832511E80D6 for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 04:52:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 06 Jun 2011 11:51:59 -0000 Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.140]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp003) with SMTP; 06 Jun 2011 13:51:59 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19UzWQpCjpUjR/Brds1a9fOYvzBKlf7XnQm05cuSa gID0GbCChifq0+ Message-ID: <4DECBF5C.5080205@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 13:51:56 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nico Williams References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DECB083.7060208@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, John C Klensin , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 11:52:02 -0000 On 2011-06-06 13:08, Nico Williams wrote: > ... >> Alice said that they do not *enforce* this, thus allow the authors section >> to include contacts not on the front page. But, as it was jsut clarified, >> this doesn't *make* those contacts authors (only the persons on the front >> page are considered authors for the purpose of AUTH48, RFC database, and >> citations). > > I can't find where she said that. > ... Three days ago; over here: >> So what's the advantage to have this confusion, instead of putting this >> information into the "Contributors" section? > > What's confusing? It's confusing to call people "authors", but not have their names appear in the RFC database or in citations. Best regards, Julian From nico@cryptonector.com Mon Jun 6 09:42:39 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E3C221F8532 for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 09:42:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Hce2qgd6kakP for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 09:42:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a72.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcaid.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.83]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D16621F8516 for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 09:42:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a72.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a72.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F17726B007E for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 09:42:37 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cryptonector.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc: content-type; q=dns; s=cryptonector.com; b=AZysBEuzCnZPoZfmoNBC+ 4oKJ75Odz6Z5lySqR/URwM3C+3sJoXVi6jpdWV3EzpKAckel2O7VLJXT+5ALhpnD C7WETqLcSQvEkil6cj9tjqbHBolhTVIsF4Z6N0y9w6WWEf2LaSnWTVSHP9tcVfCV sHjPPm0huyBd+3mtSFlcSo= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type; s=cryptonector.com; bh=v03yQHtB4cO+7gqzjTlH ksC21Qs=; b=XpuhbwZlrcDH9Rwgcu21/nRdMPQt6n9Q8PAtMGuPs51eCcnxznka vbTI3QGBZ6exlfRm2IBfgH3jvHhqbaKlsaKHSK4A2YeWwNptlPotWf2r8VQBP243 ezq1oeGRwPlh4FLHw/N57v5XyHyHEOmR9TJskSYEGIKQzKkRHZj1k88= Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a72.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BBEE26B007C for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 09:42:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vxg33 with SMTP id 33so3678274vxg.31 for ; Mon, 06 Jun 2011 09:42:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.75.37 with SMTP id z5mr7239720vdv.261.1307378556856; Mon, 06 Jun 2011 09:42:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.112.163 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 09:42:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DECBF5C.5080205@gmx.de> References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DECB083.7060208@gmx.de> <4DECBF5C.5080205@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2011 11:42:36 -0500 Message-ID: From: Nico Williams To: Julian Reschke Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, John C Klensin , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 16:42:39 -0000 On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:51 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2011-06-06 13:08, Nico Williams wrote: >>> Alice said that they do not *enforce* this, thus allow the authors >>> section >>> to include contacts not on the front page. But, as it was jsut clarified, >>> this doesn't *make* those contacts authors (only the persons on the front >>> page are considered authors for the purpose of AUTH48, RFC database, and >>> citations). >> >> I can't find where she said that. >> ... > > Three days ago; over here: > Ah, I must have been blind there for a bit. *That* I would object to. All authors in the Authors section must be considered authors when searching by author. As for citation, obviously one must shorten to "So and so et. al." at some point -- that's what's done in academic scolarship. >>> So what's the advantage to have this confusion, instead of putting this >>> information into the "Contributors" section? >> >> What's confusing? > > It's confusing to call people "authors", but not have their names appear in > the RFC database or in citations. It's unavoidable that some authors may not appear in a citation (see above). As for the RFC DB, I completely agree. Nico -- From Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com Tue Jun 7 09:58:34 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D2BC11E8163 for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 09:58:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RuNhGSNGQDkn for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 09:58:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ukmta3.baesystems.com (ukmta3.baesystems.com [20.133.40.55]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80E7311E80E0 for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 09:58:33 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,333,1304290800"; d="scan'208";a="138685415" Received: from unknown (HELO baemasodc004.greenlnk.net) ([10.108.36.11]) by Baemasodc001ir.sharelnk.net with ESMTP; 07 Jun 2011 17:58:32 +0100 Received: from glkms1102.GREENLNK.NET (glkms1102.greenlnk.net [10.108.36.193]) by baemasodc004.greenlnk.net (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p57GwVVs006155; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 17:58:31 +0100 Received: from GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET ([10.15.184.93]) by glkms1102.GREENLNK.NET with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 7 Jun 2011 17:58:31 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 17:58:30 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4DEBB81F.8010604@dcrocker.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? Thread-Index: Acwjo0k7n23r6DDKQuuUKC1DN8jfUwBjzmZg References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <4DEBB81F.8010604@dcrocker.net> From: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" To: , "RFC Editor" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jun 2011 16:58:31.0538 (UTC) FILETIME=[21602D20:01CC2534] Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 16:58:34 -0000 > The IETF distinguishes two levels of contribution: author/editor vs. 'team', > whether the team is a working group or something less formal. The team is cited > in Acknowledgements. > To provide for a distinction between the front page author list and the later > author contact set is to define a new class of contributor. The simple, > two-level arrangement has worked well for forty years. If it needs to be > modified and made more complex, the rationale needs to be compelling. To take an example where something different has been done, look at RFC 3626. This has two names top right, marked as editors, and those two names only in an Authors section. But as I understand it, it had eight authors at various stages and these are listed in a Contributors section with contact information. Certainly those people did more work than those just in the acknowledgements section (I'm one of the latter). It was (as I recall) only later in its history as an Internet Draft that the authors were reduced to two to keep under the five limit. As not an author I don't know what negotiations with the IESG/RFC Editor produced that pattern. ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. ******************************************************************** From john+xml@jck.com Tue Jun 7 10:51:21 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF12F11E8072 for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 10:51:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.3 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.300, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r5K7DdAtoz-O for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 10:51:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA11511E8082 for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 10:51:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=localhost) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1QU0Qv-000LD9-Gw; Tue, 07 Jun 2011 13:51:17 -0400 Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 13:51:16 -0400 From: John C Klensin To: Nico Williams , Julian Reschke Message-ID: <6B5D475AB867CA6321BF4E8A@PST.JCK.COM> In-Reply-To: References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DECB083.7060208@gmx.de> <4DECBF5C.5080205@gmx.de> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 17:51:22 -0000 --On Monday, June 06, 2011 11:42 -0500 Nico Williams wrote: >... > *That* I would object to. All authors in the Authors section > must be considered authors when searching by author. As for > citation, obviously one must shorten to "So and so et. al." at > some point -- that's what's done in academic scolarship. Traditionally in the RFC Series (and several academic and research style manuals), references for a document are shown as A (document whose author is A only) A and B (document whose authors are A and B only) A et al. (document whose authors are A, B, C, and maybe D and E) Recently, the ARSE has permitted an exception to list A, B, and C if it fits. Be that as it may, listing some folks as authors on the first page and an expanded list under "Authors Addresses" is just an opportunity for confusion about what belongs in the various databases, what is found on search, and to whom the special IPR provisions for Authors apply. The "Contributors" category was developed precisely to avoid some of those ambiguities. And those distinctions, IMO, turn this into a policy matter, not one that gets resolved on the basis of what xml2rfc does (or the Production Center might choose to ignore in an input document). I'm not arguing for any particular conclusion, only pointing out that these are rather fundamental "style manual" issues and that the community had agreed to defer those until after the permanent RSE is in place. >>>> So what's the advantage to have this confusion, instead of >>>> putting this information into the "Contributors" section? >>> >>> What's confusing? >> >> It's confusing to call people "authors", but not have their >> names appear in the RFC database or in citations. > > It's unavoidable that some authors may not appear in a > citation (see above). As for the RFC DB, I completely agree. Yes. but I don't know whether that is an argument for including everyone listed in "Authors' Addresses" in the database or for not including anyone in that section who isn't a real, Page 1, "author". And, unless Olaf and the IAB/RSOC change their collective minds about what decisions can be made this year, no one else knows the answer to that question either. john From john+xml@jck.com Tue Jun 7 10:58:30 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BDF011E8082 for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 10:58:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.949 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.650, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DqUfd1-nQfFm for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 10:58:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC37211E8072 for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 10:58:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=localhost) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1QU0Xr-000LLh-1l; Tue, 07 Jun 2011 13:58:27 -0400 Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 13:58:26 -0400 From: John C Klensin To: Julian Reschke Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 17:58:30 -0000 --On Sunday, June 05, 2011 12:15 +0200 Julian Reschke wrote: > My biggest concern here is that people might believe that a > contact not listed on the front page can continue to be > considered an "author". This is not the case right now, ad > thus it would be very confusing to add xml2rfc features to get > that result. I think it is part of that policy matter, but I share that concern. > If* we believe that we'll keep the authors/contributors > distinction, we should look into supporting *that* better in > xml2rfc. Julian, if I were trying to design better handling for this into xml2rfc, I'd expand that "author" element (at the risk of a slight misnomer) to include a value for "role" other than "editor". "Contributor" is obvious; one might think about also adopting the convention in many journals of "contact" (the person who agreed to take the lead for being bugged about the document). That would permit grouping all of the author/contact/etc. information in the source document (Good, IMO), would permit indexing Contributors as well as authors (or authors and editors separately) (Possibly useful), and would leave the question of sections and formatting to the output steps. Just my opinion, of course. And I could probably think of a long list of xml2rfc changes I'd consider more important, but YMMD. john From julian.reschke@gmx.de Tue Jun 7 11:06:52 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 955DD11E80A0 for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 11:06:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.139 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.139 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.540, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vQHzfaYwNpuK for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 11:06:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 3702B11E8072 for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 11:06:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 07 Jun 2011 18:06:48 -0000 Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.140]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp072) with SMTP; 07 Jun 2011 20:06:48 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19TT6gL91FT97lyK5bw8q8bF8jQ9zPVcXovR7QWk0 tRPN2DNZJbXI4Q Message-ID: <4DEE68B0.5010603@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 20:06:40 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John C Klensin References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 18:06:52 -0000 On 2011-06-07 19:58, John C Klensin wrote: > > > --On Sunday, June 05, 2011 12:15 +0200 Julian Reschke > wrote: > >> My biggest concern here is that people might believe that a >> contact not listed on the front page can continue to be >> considered an "author". This is not the case right now, ad >> thus it would be very confusing to add xml2rfc features to get >> that result. > > I think it is part of that policy matter, but I share that > concern. > >> If* we believe that we'll keep the authors/contributors >> distinction, we should look into supporting *that* better in >> xml2rfc. > > Julian, if I were trying to design better handling for this into > xml2rfc, I'd expand that "author" element (at the risk of a > slight misnomer) to include a value for "role" other than > "editor". "Contributor" is obvious; one might think about also > adopting the convention in many journals of "contact" (the > person who agreed to take the lead for being bugged about the > document). That would permit grouping all of the > author/contact/etc. information in the source document (Good, > IMO), would permit indexing Contributors as well as authors (or > authors and editors separately) (Possibly useful), and would > leave the question of sections and formatting to the output > steps. > > Just my opinion, of course. And I could probably think of a > long list of xml2rfc changes I'd consider more important, but > YMMD. :-) My preference is not to overload , as there may be code out there which assumes that elements indeed identity ... authors. Instead of that, I'd allow a element, with the same content model as . The other question is whether we need more control on where to put these. The way of least resistance would be to automatically create a "Contributors" section below the Authors section, but I hear people asking for more formatting control. Best regards, Julian From dhc2@dcrocker.net Tue Jun 7 13:12:28 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8696D11E813A for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 13:12:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iDwtlZhi8zcy for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 13:12:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCB0811E80A8 for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 13:12:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.101.0.144] (64.1.211.248.ptr.us.xo.net [64.1.211.248]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p57KCL7v017399 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 7 Jun 2011 13:12:26 -0700 Message-ID: <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 13:12:18 -0700 From: Dave CROCKER Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: xml2rfc@ietf.org References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Tue, 07 Jun 2011 13:12:26 -0700 (PDT) Cc: RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 20:12:28 -0000 On 6/6/2011 3:37 AM, Nico Williams wrote: > On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 5:15 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: >> My biggest concern here is that people might believe that a contact not >> listed on the front page can continue to be considered an "author". This is >> not the case right now, ad thus it would be very confusing to add xml2rfc >> features to get that result. > > Why is that a problem? Why would a contact not listed on the front > page but listed in the back not be useful to contact? I think your question misses the deeper issue: When you create additional structure, you invite interpretations as to its meaning. Absent highly precise definition of its meaning and 100% successful education of everyone as to that definition, people will impart meanings that are not correct. The IETF's culture has only two classes of contributors: 1) Authors 2) Everyone Else We do allow modifying the first class with the sub-label "editor", as a means of letting authors declare less direct responsibility for creating the content -- that is, for implying that the content really was created by a larger team. (And choice of adding the editor label seems to be nearly randomly made by authors...) But that's it. The model is otherwise trivial and consistent. Having the front page be a subset of the detailed Author section is really an attempt to invent a new class of contributor. (For reference, I did see the earlier reference to an existence proof for allowing this. That is, I know it's been done. However it's still rare enough for us to declare it a mistake and prohibit future cases.) Before we institutionalize mechanisms for having the Author section be a superset of the names listed on the front page, we should see a compelling justification and develop some community consensus around the cultural change it creates. On 6/6/2011 4:51 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > It's confusing to call people "authors", but not have their names appear in the > RFC database or in citations. +1 > > > On 6/7/2011 11:06 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: >> My preference is not to overload , as there may be code out there which >> assumes that elements indeed identity ... authors. >> >> Instead of that, I'd allow a element, with the same content model as >> . +10 Note that this can be accomplished today, with the existing xml2rfc tool and without any policy changes by the RFC Editor. A change to xml2rfc, to create the specific, structured element would make that section a bit easier to construct, but it's not essential. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From nico@cryptonector.com Tue Jun 7 14:05:14 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAC5611E809B for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 14:05:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W6S6CNbiLgXM for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 14:05:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a16.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdccac.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.202]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A33311E807A for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 14:05:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a16.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a16.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4880E50807F for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 14:05:13 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cryptonector.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s= cryptonector.com; b=tvxCmiNqV4w2nZWcVd7qJivwCb2LK1oFgjRSZO/ne2nm fB+e1bqx5q6LGHn4CmaSE7yhyOfhH4XLkxDP0BWAYQCm/CFa7PPUObeLKaM71KAt lKcQsRF3N1J+2fMqGAoGYbJicQPRt07vUDR+MRF37pB/pfAMVYesyH/HjD1iIS8= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= cryptonector.com; bh=5IKswiSq2nFcXP0oYSdwberZ1Kk=; b=jZp601V7SO1 pkTgNvtXmzLUQAvJIe/64L5tyutKGQaeZGpfvle9bHRVQoUGpzIIxhoBQ4BSUaPf Pn5HLI06tmGpi2uPqqIbyFN+FO6U5VAlOnWSoF0c9SOGC2Vi0n55sNuv+Igb691y HnRZWMQAcJmKuTpY2SsnaRLqhwH+wc4I= Received: from mail-pv0-f172.google.com (mail-pv0-f172.google.com [74.125.83.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a16.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 384CA50807D for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 14:05:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pvh18 with SMTP id 18so1193366pvh.31 for ; Tue, 07 Jun 2011 14:05:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.14.103 with SMTP id o7mr428487pbc.523.1307480712771; Tue, 07 Jun 2011 14:05:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.50.39 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 14:05:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 16:05:12 -0500 Message-ID: From: Nico Williams To: dcrocker@bbiw.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 21:05:14 -0000 On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote: > On 6/6/2011 3:37 AM, Nico Williams wrote: >> Why is that a problem? =C2=A0Why would a contact not listed on the front >> page but listed in the back not be useful to contact? > > I think your question misses the deeper issue: > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 When you create additional structure, you invite interpreta= tions as to > its meaning. I don't think we disagree as to that. The disagreement is about how confusing two classes of authors might be. I don't think it will be confusing at all. For example, when I look at the front page of an RFC I don't learn any author's contact info, just their names and organization abbreviation -- if I want to contact them at all I must turn to the Authors section at the end of the RFC, and that's exactly what I do. I suspect everyone else does the same. > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Absent highly precise definition of its meaning and 100% su= ccessful > education of everyone as to that definition, people will impart meanings > that are not correct. I don't see what's imprecise here: the authors and RFC-Editor agree on who will be on the front page and who will be the "et. al." and all go into the Authors section. The former also appear on citation, while all can be used for RFC DB searches (this would be my requirement). Where's the lack of precision? > The IETF's culture has only two classes of contributors: > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 1) =C2=A0Authors > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 2) =C2=A0Everyone Else That wouldn't change. I and I'm sure everyone else already turn to the back pages to get author contact info, necessarily. > Having the front page be a subset of the detailed Author section is reall= y > an attempt to invent a new class of contributor. =C2=A0(For reference, I = did see > the earlier reference to an existence proof for allowing this. That is, I > know it's been done. =C2=A0However it's still rare enough for us to decla= re it a > mistake and prohibit future cases.) To me it's just an attempt to manage a scarce resource: front page real estate. I think that's pretty obvious. Let's flip this around: our typographic conventions are dictating conventions for authorship versus contributorship. You don't see a problem with that?? It's really odd to let typographic conventions dictate more important matters, shocking even. Nico -- From julian.reschke@gmx.de Tue Jun 7 22:52:06 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A7A711E808E for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 22:52:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vTIwApJySyU3 for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 22:52:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 1575A11E807C for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 22:52:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 08 Jun 2011 05:52:02 -0000 Received: from p508F9EE3.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.36]) [80.143.158.227] by mail.gmx.net (mp042) with SMTP; 08 Jun 2011 07:52:02 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19MappJSYdMJjun8lcmenlxVXa6804B0YZWiJHzQr ck0Y74+lt1GdnI Message-ID: <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 07:51:51 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nico Williams References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, dcrocker@bbiw.net, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 05:52:06 -0000 On 2011-06-07 23:05, Nico Williams wrote: > ... > To me it's just an attempt to manage a scarce resource: front page > real estate. I think that's pretty obvious. > ... I've also heard that one motivation was to keep the AUTH48 phase manageable. What's your opinion on who needs to approve publication? > Let's flip this around: our typographic conventions are dictating > conventions for authorship versus contributorship. You don't see a > problem with that?? > > It's really odd to let typographic conventions dictate more important > matters, shocking even. > ... It doesn't dictate. it advises. There is no hard limit, as far as I understand. Best regards, Julian From nico@cryptonector.com Wed Jun 8 07:52:39 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BB5A21F84DF for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 07:52:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.153 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.153 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.177, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2Hg4tnNhsN+T for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 07:52:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a28.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcbbj.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.119]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E962A21F84D7 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 07:52:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a28.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a28.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FBE11B4083 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 07:52:35 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cryptonector.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc: content-type; q=dns; s=cryptonector.com; b=YJEEk4pRENhdvr7ql9Wlu S761DvfgDmLKFzHRCua7ZU/Uf7v1oithVz1RjbX6jT3qMSW227gVjLP5MWWthHiq IhFqcFmYm6MtX4pAWFQof3bMD41HcUuuWaiQUDCRZRDn8XN0POzdcgJpVJN4gCnA DQn/bsiBtSltABq3yL/k5U= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type; s=cryptonector.com; bh=9gbt9gxTM3C7k7CVd0rh 2uxroy8=; b=BX5Lpdc6za6iQiYITjD9I267eG0sQ0mVUXVUKBlD0pX5ZIT5EQ1R mCRQ1G8EwBMMvb8KamXJ0QCDyUqz5/q0M6PcGga0dnHNXQp3SgDVPoajhaH+9u1u sO1XNoA3QChOQrga99EjULJF67/beSikuGwh7gKFq1ElINHND5cW0lc= Received: from mail-pw0-f44.google.com (mail-pw0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a28.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 88E5F1B405F for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 07:52:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pwi5 with SMTP id 5so313326pwi.31 for ; Wed, 08 Jun 2011 07:52:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.17.7 with SMTP id k7mr928599pbd.322.1307544755153; Wed, 08 Jun 2011 07:52:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.50.39 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 07:52:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.50.39 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 07:52:33 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 09:52:33 -0500 Message-ID: From: Nico Williams To: Julian Reschke Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec5216071a8a97c04a5347ca3 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, dcrocker@bbiw.net, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 14:52:39 -0000 --bcaec5216071a8a97c04a5347ca3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Jun 8, 2011 12:52 AM, "Julian Reschke" wrote: > > On 2011-06-07 23:05, Nico Williams wrote: >> >> ... >> >> To me it's just an attempt to manage a scarce resource: front page >> real estate. I think that's pretty obvious. >> ... > > > I've also heard that one motivation was to keep the AUTH48 phase manageable. > > What's your opinion on who needs to approve publication? The authors should designate AUTH48 contacts and the shepherd should tell the RFC-Editor who they are. But all should be cc'ed. >> Let's flip this around: our typographic conventions are dictating >> conventions for authorship versus contributorship. You don't see a >> problem with that?? >> >> It's really odd to let typographic conventions dictate more important >> matters, shocking even. >> ... > > > It doesn't dictate. it advises. There is no hard limit, as far as I understand. Surely things break at some point. --bcaec5216071a8a97c04a5347ca3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Jun 8, 2011 12:52 AM, "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> On 2011-06-07 23:05, Nico Williams wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>> To me it's just an attempt to manage a scarce resource: front = page
>> real estate. =C2=A0I think that's pretty obvious.
>> ...
>
>
> I've also heard that one motivation was to keep the AUTH48 phase m= anageable.
>
> What's your opinion on who needs to approve publication?

The authors should designate AUTH48 contacts and the shepherd should tel= l the RFC-Editor who they are.=C2=A0 But all should be cc'ed.

>> Let's flip this around: our typographic conventions are dic= tating
>> conventions for authorship versus contributorship. =C2=A0You don&#= 39;t see a
>> problem with that??
>>
>> It's really odd to let typographic conventions dictate more im= portant
>> matters, shocking even.
>> ...
>
>
> It doesn't dictate. it advises. There is no hard limit, as far as = I understand.

Surely things break at some point.

--bcaec5216071a8a97c04a5347ca3-- From dhc2@dcrocker.net Wed Jun 8 09:17:40 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0203B11E81BC for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 09:17:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U0mcU-Oc0YFy for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 09:17:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7FCF11E81B3 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 09:17:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.101.0.144] (64.1.211.248.ptr.us.xo.net [64.1.211.248]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p58GHVwn023309 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 8 Jun 2011 09:17:37 -0700 Message-ID: <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 09:17:28 -0700 From: Dave CROCKER Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nico Williams References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Wed, 08 Jun 2011 09:17:37 -0700 (PDT) Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, dcrocker@bbiw.net, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 16:17:40 -0000 On 6/8/2011 7:52 AM, Nico Williams wrote: > The authors should designate AUTH48 contacts and the shepherd should tell the > RFC-Editor who they are. But all should be cc'ed. So, without having any compelling need for changing a well-running system, let's create additional, formal structure, by distinguishing a new class of participants. Then, since that creates an ambiguity with an essential document processing step, let's create more mechanism to fix this. An entirely revolutionary alternative would be to observe that things have been working well and no significant problem exists that needs solving. So we should leave things alone. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From dbharrington@comcast.net Wed Jun 8 13:54:32 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BC851F0C35 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 13:54:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gb0HXED95AJT for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 13:54:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from qmta12.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta12.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [76.96.59.227]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FDD51F0C46 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 13:54:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omta02.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.19]) by qmta12.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id tYPm1g0080QuhwU5CYuVY7; Wed, 08 Jun 2011 20:54:29 +0000 Received: from davidPC ([67.189.235.106]) by omta02.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id tYuU1g00B2JQnJT3NYuUb0; Wed, 08 Jun 2011 20:54:29 +0000 From: "David B Harrington" To: , "'Nico Williams'" References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM><4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> In-Reply-To: <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 16:54:22 -0400 Message-ID: <7F6F40A04F5E4A6081E24C1CEC3D716F@davidPC> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.1.7600.16776 Thread-Index: Acwl95hYnCzZZQN3QBK4mvJFXbvVnQAJqK4g Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, 'RFC Editor' Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 20:54:33 -0000 +1 dbh > -----Original Message----- > From: xml2rfc-bounces@ietf.org > [mailto:xml2rfc-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dave CROCKER > Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 12:17 PM > To: Nico Williams > Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org; dcrocker@bbiw.net; RFC Editor > Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? > > > > On 6/8/2011 7:52 AM, Nico Williams wrote: > > The authors should designate AUTH48 contacts and the > shepherd should tell the > > RFC-Editor who they are. But all should be cc'ed. > > > So, without having any compelling need for changing a > well-running system, let's > create additional, formal structure, by distinguishing a new class of > participants. > > Then, since that creates an ambiguity with an essential > document processing > step, let's create more mechanism to fix this. > > An entirely revolutionary alternative would be to observe > that things have been > working well and no significant problem exists that needs solving. > > So we should leave things alone. > > d/ > -- > > Dave Crocker > Brandenburg InternetWorking > bbiw.net > _______________________________________________ > xml2rfc mailing list > xml2rfc@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc > From rse@rfc-editor.org Thu Jun 9 04:05:53 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACB3111E80A7 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 04:05:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5WoEaNG5ZCCh for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 04:05:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (mail.amsl.com [64.170.98.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEDCE11E8093 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 04:05:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c1a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D66351C3852E; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 04:05:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c1a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c1a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Q1engrkx2vwi; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 04:05:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp-97.nlnetlabs.nl (dhcp-97.nlnetlabs.nl [213.154.224.97]) by c1a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8A7DD1C3852A; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 04:05:51 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Olaf Kolkman (Acting RFC Series Editor)" In-Reply-To: <7F6F40A04F5E4A6081E24C1CEC3D716F@davidPC> Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 13:05:48 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <0E7ED525-C422-4617-99E1-E96A369B28AC@rfc-editor.org> References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM><4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> <7F6F40A04F5E4A6081E24C1CEC3D716F@davidPC> To: RFC Editor , xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 08:44:09 -0700 Cc: Dave CROCKER Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 11:59:10 -0000 Colleagues, I've been following this thread with interest and been discussing the topic with the Production Center staff. A few comments: First, there are at this time, and in relation to how authors are handled, no specific requirements from the RFC Editor for XML2RFC functionality. I do not see any problems with XML2RFC having a few extra handles that might in the future be able to deal with different policies than those we use now. Second, the RFC Editor policy is, and has been for more than a decade, to recommend that if there are more than 5 authors that a special 'Contributors Section' is created. Exceptions are made as necessary. Although it is not enforced policy currently (and there are exceptions) the RFC editor will continue to strive to have a 1-to-1-to-1 mapping between the authors in the header, the authors in the Authors Addresses section, and the authors in the RFC meta data. Going forward we will strive to implement as such. However, I will not rigidly set this as policy until a new RSE has had the ability to spend cycles on this. I assume this situation will not occur during the rest of my tenure and that exceptions can be avoided. I hope this helps to converge the discussion Olaf, as Acting RFC Series Editor. PS: This started with: On May 10, 2011, at 10:54 AM, Thomas Morin wrote: > While reviewing a draft I edit, the AD in charge pointed out the > usual "too many authors on the front page" > > issue: Would it be possible to consider moving everyone except for > > the editor off the front page? [all authors] will still all be > > listed as authors at the end of the document. It should be clear from the above that if asked, the RFC Editor would have suggested to move some of the authors to a contributors section and not given the advice that this AD had given. From dcrocker@bbiw.net Thu Jun 9 09:13:50 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B2A611E8133 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 09:13:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aAs1pxKNvwW4 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 09:13:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF2A311E80EA for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 09:13:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.101.0.144] (64.1.211.248.ptr.us.xo.net [64.1.211.248]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p59GDfRv018115 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 9 Jun 2011 09:13:47 -0700 Message-ID: <4DF0F131.2060607@bbiw.net> Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 09:13:37 -0700 From: Dave CROCKER Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Olaf Kolkman (Acting RFC Series Editor)" References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM><4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> <7F6F40A04F5E4A6081E24C1CEC3D716F@davidPC> <0E7ED525-C422-4617-99E1-E96A369B28AC@rfc-editor.org> In-Reply-To: <0E7ED525-C422-4617-99E1-E96A369B28AC@rfc-editor.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Thu, 09 Jun 2011 09:13:47 -0700 (PDT) Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 16:13:50 -0000 Olaf, Many thanks for the posting and clarifications. A few comments... On 6/9/2011 4:05 AM, Olaf Kolkman (Acting RFC Series Editor) wrote: > Second, the RFC Editor policy is, and has been for more than a decade, > to recommend that if there are more than 5 authors that a special > 'Contributors Section' is created. Exceptions are made as necessary. An implication of this extended discussion thread and of who has been participating in it: No one knows about that section, although I do see it documented in the RFC Document Style Guide: , Section 4.8, y). But apparently it hasn't been socialized. Since it is exactly the approach some of us have been "proposing", it might be worth promoting it more... However the document reasonably notes that it might contain more than just contributor contact information, to comment on the details of their contribution. Still, it might be worth having xml2rfc know about the section, so it can provide structured support for the contact information, along with the optional commentary. > Although it is not enforced policy currently (and there are > exceptions) the RFC editor will continue to strive to have a > 1-to-1-to-1 mapping between the authors in the header, the authors in > the Authors Addresses section, and the authors in the RFC meta > data. This is where this is a possible problem, since xml2rfc doesn't support the split and I sure wish it were not required to. > Going forward we will strive to implement as such. Just to make sure I understand this statement: within the constraints of your being /acting/ RSE, you plan is to apply a 1:1:1 rule? > It should be clear from the above that if asked, the RFC Editor would > have suggested to move some of the authors to a contributors section > and not given the advice that this AD had given. Again, I think there's an underlying problem that few, if any, experienced folk knew about the additional section. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From rse@rfc-editor.org Tue Jun 14 01:04:24 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1025211E8120 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:04:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZZKS-GRZPmdR for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:04:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (mail.amsl.com [64.170.98.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A76A11E811E for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:04:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c1a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90F621C3852A; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:04:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c1a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c1a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 65I3tS11m7S8; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:04:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aagje.fritz.box (xs4all.dacht.net [82.95.132.144]) by c1a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EE5CA1C38527; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:04:18 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Olaf Kolkman (Acting RFC Series Editor)" In-Reply-To: <4DF0F131.2060607@bbiw.net> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 10:04:15 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <97883BAA-6435-45CC-B13D-80740B373155@rfc-editor.org> References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM><4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> <7F6F40A04F5E4A6081E24C1CEC3D716F@davidPC> <0E7ED525-C422-4617-99E1-E96A369B28AC@rfc-editor.org> <4DF0F131.2060607@bbiw.net> To: Dave CROCKER X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:04:24 -0000 On Jun 9, 2011, at 6:13 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote: >>=20 >> Going forward we will strive to implement as such. >=20 > Just to make sure I understand this statement: within the constraints = of your being /acting/ RSE, you plan is to apply a 1:1:1 rule? >=20 Acknowledged. Obviously without availability of sticks or carrots. >> It should be clear from the above that if asked, the RFC Editor would >> have suggested to move some of the authors to a contributors section >> and not given the advice that this AD had given. >=20 > Again, I think there's an underlying problem that few, if any, = experienced folk knew about the additional section. Clear, any suggestions on how to fix that?=20 --Olaf= From dcrocker@bbiw.net Tue Jun 14 07:45:29 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F25B9E801E for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 07:45:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hZ4v58ljjr-D for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 07:45:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9C619E801C for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 07:45:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.15] (adsl-67-127-56-68.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.127.56.68]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p5EEjKh0011405 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 14 Jun 2011 07:45:26 -0700 Message-ID: <4DF773F9.20303@bbiw.net> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 07:45:13 -0700 From: Dave CROCKER Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Olaf Kolkman (Acting RFC Series Editor)" References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM><4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> <7F6F40A04F5E4A6081E24C1CEC3D716F@davidPC> <0E7ED525-C422-4617-99E1-E96A369B28AC@rfc-editor.org> <4DF0F131.2060607@bbiw.net> <97883BAA-6435-45CC-B13D-80740B373155@rfc-editor.org> In-Reply-To: <97883BAA-6435-45CC-B13D-80740B373155@rfc-editor.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Tue, 14 Jun 2011 07:45:26 -0700 (PDT) Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:45:29 -0000 On 6/14/2011 1:04 AM, Olaf Kolkman (Acting RFC Series Editor) wrote: >> Again, I think there's an underlying problem that few, if any, experienced folk knew about the additional section. > > Clear, any suggestions on how to fix that? In an IETF in which almost everyone thinks that the rules require normative words to be capitalized, probably not... I was going to suggest something cheap and easy, as a small effort in that direction, but decided to confirm that it wasn't already in the style guide: Alas, Section 4 already contains the simple template I was thinking of, with "Contributors" included... sigh. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From nico@cryptonector.com Tue Jun 14 08:27:07 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63E4F11E8098 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:27:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.227 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.227 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.250, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fKsIgdoLnNln for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:27:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a27.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdccac.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.202]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8036411E808D for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:27:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a27.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a27.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24391598085 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:27:06 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cryptonector.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc: content-type; q=dns; s=cryptonector.com; b=oRpYCk+s0+EnAOoom45dv ifM5UdFDzmyd3uew8TSbvSHH0Aw8HJGg5ivWJfCnKVuQv9q51ALlxdI/F0wlEtbv mdSDmpTmUcFyJ4cbSR6T6Wo40m2pIzTiFU8KrAcm0fmw66gAgGTOU2FvqJ9MroLB lz+bO3OFU5OiXbFW0TSFN0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type; s=cryptonector.com; bh=9RObYCWh7S8pgzbQCdPY txBnOVI=; b=icsn3ICnhD+jZXk6g3PB6YhghmLQSU768yPqsHNsPJF/e0UlMv8c vwo8LEW72aOzmkGhOtIMTVHF+dyB3f1zOpc1/+esMABf8iqY4Nqe2PpfMi19kJ5s vCZu/TPr4EhDeuzdFT5TAXPMxyCb3NFXP8nqrXf6Meo84sSS9P8gNdo= Received: from mail-pv0-f172.google.com (mail-pv0-f172.google.com [74.125.83.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a27.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 01D2B59807D for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:27:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pvh18 with SMTP id 18so2938134pvh.31 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:27:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.41.65 with SMTP id d1mr2794690pbl.255.1308065225576; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:27:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.50.39 with HTTP; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:27:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 10:27:03 -0500 Message-ID: From: Nico Williams To: dcrocker@bbiw.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:27:07 -0000 Fair enough. As long as Alice seemed to be representing a desire by the RFC-Editor for this change I was willing to support it. I'm clearly on the rough side of consensus here, so I'll drop it. Nico -- From daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com Tue Jun 14 08:35:25 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3937711E80B4 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:35:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rhM2UDj1cc53 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:35:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw10.se.ericsson.net (mailgw10.se.ericsson.net [193.180.251.61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3FF811E8169 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:35:12 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb3d-b7c17ae00000262e-05-4df77faf4943 Received: from esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by mailgw10.se.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 57.0C.09774.FAF77FD4; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 17:35:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ESESSCMS0360.eemea.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.174]) by esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.115.87]) with mapi; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 17:35:08 +0200 From: Daniele Ceccarelli To: Nico Williams , "dcrocker@bbiw.net" Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 17:35:07 +0200 Thread-Topic: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? Thread-Index: Acwqp4k1x7fSMccYTQ2uMIUfW5O6vgAABuCQ Message-ID: References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: it-IT, en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Cc: "xml2rfc@ietf.org" , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:35:25 -0000 Hi, For what it's worth, i use xml2rfc a lot and the "notfirstpage" option woul= d be *extremely* helpful to allow all the authors being listed in the same = section (i.e. "Author's addresses). If introducing such enhancement does not cause any major issue i would real= ly appreaciate it. Thanks Daniele -----Original Message----- From: xml2rfc-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:xml2rfc-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf = Of Nico Williams Sent: marted=EC 14 giugno 2011 17.27 To: dcrocker@bbiw.net Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org; RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? Fair enough. As long as Alice seemed to be representing a desire by the RFC-Editor for t= his change I was willing to support it. I'm clearly on the rough side of c= onsensus here, so I'll drop it. Nico -- _______________________________________________ xml2rfc mailing list xml2rfc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc From dcrocker@bbiw.net Tue Jun 14 08:42:03 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BD1D11E812A for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:42:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IPvxCf3mh9JN for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:42:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72A9C11E80B4 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:42:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.15] (adsl-67-127-56-68.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.127.56.68]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p5EFfr4e013061 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:41:58 -0700 Message-ID: <4DF7813A.9010901@bbiw.net> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:41:46 -0700 From: Dave CROCKER Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniele Ceccarelli References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:41:58 -0700 (PDT) Cc: "xml2rfc@ietf.org" , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:42:03 -0000 On 6/14/2011 8:35 AM, Daniele Ceccarelli wrote: > Hi, > > For what it's worth, i use xml2rfc a lot and the "notfirstpage" option would be *extremely* helpful to allow all the authors being listed in the same section (i.e. "Author's addresses). > > If introducing such enhancement does not cause any major issue i would really appreaciate it. use the existing "Contributors" section that we've been discussing. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com Tue Jun 14 09:03:43 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41A0011E80A0 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:03:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DcavvYYkots4 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:03:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw10.se.ericsson.net (mailgw10.se.ericsson.net [193.180.251.61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 525C211E8078 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:03:42 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb3d-b7c17ae00000262e-ee-4df7865d78b1 Received: from esessmw0184.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by mailgw10.se.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id A2.1A.09774.D5687FD4; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:03:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ESESSCMS0360.eemea.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.174]) by esessmw0184.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.115.81]) with mapi; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:03:40 +0200 From: Daniele Ceccarelli To: Dave CROCKER Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:03:39 +0200 Thread-Topic: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? Thread-Index: AcwqqZqb4HI/1R4XTHqrccvLTOMaWgAAgNBQ Message-ID: References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> <4DF7813A.9010901@bbiw.net> In-Reply-To: <4DF7813A.9010901@bbiw.net> Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: it-IT, en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Cc: "xml2rfc@ietf.org" , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:03:43 -0000 It makes a sort of distinction between more important authors (listed in th= e Author's address section) and less important authors (listed in the Contr= ibutors list)...i saw people "disappointed" about that... The problem is usually solved with one author per company in the front page= but all of them in the Author's address section (manually edited) Thanks, Daniele -----Original Message----- From: Dave CROCKER [mailto:dcrocker@bbiw.net]=20 Sent: marted=EC 14 giugno 2011 17.42 To: Daniele Ceccarelli Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org; RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? On 6/14/2011 8:35 AM, Daniele Ceccarelli wrote: > Hi, > > For what it's worth, i use xml2rfc a lot and the "notfirstpage" option wo= uld be *extremely* helpful to allow all the authors being listed in the sam= e section (i.e. "Author's addresses). > > If introducing such enhancement does not cause any major issue i would re= ally appreaciate it. use the existing "Contributors" section that we've been discussing. d/ --=20 Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From dcrocker@bbiw.net Tue Jun 14 09:40:19 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4778C11E8096 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:40:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0Srlss0n9j6h for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:40:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 993D911E807F for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:40:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.15] (adsl-67-127-56-68.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.127.56.68]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p5EGeAmu014808 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:40:15 -0700 Message-ID: <4DF78EE3.4080906@bbiw.net> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:40:03 -0700 From: Dave CROCKER Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniele Ceccarelli References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> <4DF7813A.9010901@bbiw.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:40:15 -0700 (PDT) Cc: "xml2rfc@ietf.org" , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:40:19 -0000 On 6/14/2011 9:03 AM, Daniele Ceccarelli wrote: > It makes a sort of distinction between more important authors (listed in the Author's address section) and less important authors (listed in the Contributors list)...i saw people "disappointed" about that... Ahh, I see. You want the IETF to change its culture and then to support the change formally in its documents. I, for one, do not. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From ned.freed@mrochek.com Tue Jun 14 09:08:28 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BB9111E80A0 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:08:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id odRIC4FFwzRL for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:08:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mauve.mrochek.com (mauve.mrochek.com [66.59.230.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 686E611E807F for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:08:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01O2GUN9I29S00TWL5@mauve.mrochek.com> for xml2rfc@ietf.org; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:05:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01O2GQA0X3V400RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com>; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:05:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-id: <01O2GUN8APN600RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:00:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Ned Freed In-reply-to: "Your message dated Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:41:46 -0700" <4DF7813A.9010901@bbiw.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; Format=flowed References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> <4DF7813A.9010901@bbiw.net> To: Dave CROCKER DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=mrochek.com; s=mauve; t=1308067190; bh=ROleXO+E2Nr015l0/q2lfJcILfFE4PEDU7Uchte1QA0=; h=Cc:Message-id:Date:From:Subject:In-reply-to:MIME-version: Content-type:References:To; b=oU7KKdMoVvaBBeHNCd3HL7Fant1c/UblOpHWrfRSPKhd4TWn/7iKesq2J2S4Umm2W pS6JyxRl+PKfhujuV6cgvLqXQiD760SfpU+cBiwRon3qqa7GDfPP3dW7KtkLya1BjV ytiNeWxplWWbx/R0i748z2Id2QTME96hUlgDbwF8= X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:44:15 -0700 Cc: "xml2rfc@ietf.org" , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:08:28 -0000 > On 6/14/2011 8:35 AM, Daniele Ceccarelli wrote: > > Hi, > > > > For what it's worth, i use xml2rfc a lot and the "notfirstpage" option would be *extremely* helpful to allow all the authors being listed in the same section (i.e. "Author's addresses). > > > > If introducing such enhancement does not cause any major issue i would really appreaciate it. > use the existing "Contributors" section that we've been discussing. AFAIK any Contributors section has to be constructed manually - there's no way to do it (directly) using something akin to elements. There are certainly times when it would be easier to work with a bunch of elements that get turned into a contributor section. And perhaps more importantly, adding structure to the content is generally a good thing. Ned From dcrocker@bbiw.net Tue Jun 14 09:48:33 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3542D11E815F for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:48:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fgmt90mq4GLs for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:48:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F5D711E811E for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:48:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.15] (adsl-67-127-56-68.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.127.56.68]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p5EGmO2n015066 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:48:29 -0700 Message-ID: <4DF790D2.9090307@bbiw.net> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:48:18 -0700 From: Dave CROCKER Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ned Freed References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> <4DF7813A.9010901@bbiw.net> <01O2GUN8APN600RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> In-Reply-To: <01O2GUN8APN600RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:48:30 -0700 (PDT) Cc: "xml2rfc@ietf.org" , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:48:33 -0000 On 6/14/2011 9:00 AM, Ned Freed wrote: >> use the existing "Contributors" section that we've been discussing. > > AFAIK any Contributors section has to be constructed manually - there's no way > to do it (directly) using something akin to elements. Yeah, and it seems to me worth trying to get xml2rfc to support a structure. > There are certainly times when it would be easier to work with a bunch of > elements that get turned into a contributor section. And perhaps more > importantly, adding structure to the content is generally a good thing. From the discussion on this lengthy thread, I think that the construct is a variant of the Authors section. It needs: 1. An opening statement, for introducing the contents. 2. A set of and pairs, where the latter is for commenting on the former; that is, for describing their contribution. ( doesn't already permit a free-text field of this sort.) d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From ned.freed@mrochek.com Tue Jun 14 17:58:46 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDAF51F0C6D for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 17:58:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_51=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CTwY4Bjtk+ip for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 17:58:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mauve.mrochek.com (mauve.mrochek.com [66.59.230.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 361CF1F0C61 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 17:58:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01O2HD9D4QK000T5JS@mauve.mrochek.com> for xml2rfc@ietf.org; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 17:58:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01O2HAJ41RWW00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com>; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 17:58:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-id: <01O2HD9B59GI00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 17:55:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Ned Freed In-reply-to: "Your message dated Tue, 14 Jun 2011 09:48:18 -0700" <4DF790D2.9090307@bbiw.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; Format=flowed References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> <4DF7813A.9010901@bbiw.net> <01O2GUN8APN600RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> <4DF790D2.9090307@bbiw.net> To: Dave CROCKER DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=mrochek.com; s=mauve; t=1308099181; bh=UYE+9icHQm5gd9WKxnTGG7waq8vN7kCARSZH6dSUomQ=; h=Cc:Message-id:Date:From:Subject:In-reply-to:MIME-version: Content-type:References:To; b=jvw68zihCcoJWSnnRRyB9rEEaiEFLQY+eWHa6fbTErWvKQCDFPutt5/WDTuDaLIVB nGMhWuSdLbF+efbovYy9iggpERobjAFUZTiLXAzj1EDDIco76Gohyeg6dbVUJP3saL G7lmD/EP9pUkgGd6t+h5AYGjxVtgfsq1kOv0Wa24= Cc: "xml2rfc@ietf.org" , Ned Freed , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 00:58:46 -0000 > On 6/14/2011 9:00 AM, Ned Freed wrote: > >> use the existing "Contributors" section that we've been discussing. > > > > AFAIK any Contributors section has to be constructed manually - there's no way > > to do it (directly) using something akin to elements. > Yeah, and it seems to me worth trying to get xml2rfc to support a > structure. > > There are certainly times when it would be easier to work with a bunch of > > elements that get turned into a contributor section. And perhaps more > > importantly, adding structure to the content is generally a good thing. > From the discussion on this lengthy thread, I think that the construct is a > variant of the Authors section. > It needs: > 1. An opening statement, for introducing the contents. > 2. A set of and pairs, where the latter is for commenting on the > former; that is, for describing their contribution. ( doesn't already > permit a free-text field of this sort.) Agreed on all points. This, incidentally, is why a simpler status indicator on the author element won't do - there'a a common subset of information, but contributor sections require additional associated commentary. Ned From gwz@net-zen.net Tue Jun 14 19:06:48 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90AAD11E807E for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 19:06:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7lN5TTQCAYiF for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 19:06:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpauth21.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (smtpauth21.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net [64.202.165.38]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DF02411E8076 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 19:06:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 2449 invoked from network); 15 Jun 2011 02:06:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (124.120.160.26) by smtpauth21.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (64.202.165.38) with ESMTP; 15 Jun 2011 02:06:45 -0000 Message-ID: <4DF813B0.8080504@net-zen.net> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 09:06:40 +0700 From: Glen Zorn Organization: Network Zen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniele Ceccarelli References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE8622.9090601@dcrocker.net> <4DEF0DF7.7000408@gmx.de> <4DEFA098.6050806@dcrocker.net> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------050808060105090503040206" Cc: "xml2rfc@ietf.org" , "dcrocker@bbiw.net" , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 02:06:48 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------050808060105090503040206 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 6/14/2011 10:35 PM, Daniele Ceccarelli wrote: > Hi, > > For what it's worth, i use xml2rfc a lot and the "notfirstpage" option would be *extremely* helpful to allow all the authors being listed in the same section (i.e. "Author's addresses). I would think that that 1) understanding (by all parties involved) that the "limit" on the number of authors is a _guideline_, nothing more, nothing less and 2) ceasing the practice of "piling on" authors to demonstrate corporate support for a document (a la 3GPP*) would be much more helpful to everyone. The first requires that no tool enforces the limit as if the limit was more than a suggestion (easy to do) but the second requires self-control and recognition of more than one paradigm for SDOs (potentially much more difficult). ... --------------050808060105090503040206 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=utf-8; name="gwz.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="gwz.vcf" begin:vcard fn:Glen Zorn n:Zorn;Glen org:Network Zen adr:;;;Seattle;WA;;USA email;internet:gwz@net-zen.net tel;cell:+66 87 040 4617 note:PGP Key Fingerprint: DAD3 F5D3 ACE6 4195 9C5C 2EE1 6E17 B5F6 5953 B45F version:2.1 end:vcard --------------050808060105090503040206-- From john+xml@jck.com Wed Jun 15 02:18:10 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFED61F0C84 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 02:18:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.166 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.166 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.433, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W2NgAoVuzs7N for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 02:18:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E50D51F0C66 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 02:18:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=localhost) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1QWmEh-000234-UP; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 05:18:08 -0400 Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 05:18:07 -0400 From: John C Klensin To: Julian Reschke Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4DEE68B0.5010603@gmx.de> References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE68B0.5010603@gmx.de> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 09:18:10 -0000 (Sorry -- reading out of order and just spotted this...) --On Tuesday, June 07, 2011 20:06 +0200 Julian Reschke wrote: >> Just my opinion, of course. And I could probably think of a >> long list of xml2rfc changes I'd consider more important, but >> YMMD. > > :-) > > My preference is not to overload , as there may be > code out there which assumes that elements indeed > identity ... authors. > > Instead of that, I'd allow a element, with the same > content model as . But... editors are authors for some purposes and not for others, so we already have that problem. And contributors are not much different. That said, I can live with , although we'd probably want to call it something else since we usually don't list addresses for contributors. But that would work for me. > The other question is whether we need more control on where to > put these. The way of least resistance would be to > automatically create a "Contributors" section below the > Authors section, but I hear people asking for more formatting > control. See my earlier note. I don't think order of sections/ blocks is really formatting control, but do think that we need a way to specify where Contributor sections and Index sections (of which there might, in a better world, be more than one) go. I suspect that list might get longer as time goes on. The SGML-ish solution to this (not necessarily as good a match to XML) would be to introduce a trick element such as (in XML syntax): with obvious future extensibility if more of these turn up. best, john From julian.reschke@gmx.de Wed Jun 15 02:42:18 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5C3411E810E for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 02:42:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.626 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.626 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.027, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MYgSUfMMWqnK for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 02:42:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id D5F1011E8083 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 02:42:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 15 Jun 2011 09:42:15 -0000 Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.140]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp069) with SMTP; 15 Jun 2011 11:42:15 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+vpAAGAvavhNK3zBPp3rs2fKkBkrfjS5JeEtuLVp v7jFCZm702oHOP Message-ID: <4DF87E77.20707@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 11:42:15 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John C Klensin References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE68B0.5010603@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 09:42:19 -0000 On 2011-06-15 11:18, John C Klensin wrote: > (Sorry -- reading out of order and just spotted this...) > > --On Tuesday, June 07, 2011 20:06 +0200 Julian Reschke > wrote: > >>> Just my opinion, of course. And I could probably think of a >>> long list of xml2rfc changes I'd consider more important, but >>> YMMD. >> >> :-) >> >> My preference is not to overload, as there may be >> code out there which assumes that elements indeed >> identity ... authors. >> >> Instead of that, I'd allow a element, with the same >> content model as. > > But... editors are authors for some purposes and not for others, > so we already have that problem. And contributors are not much Not the way it works now: you can attach "role=editor" to an author, but the contact will continue to be considered an author (for the purpose of citations, AUTH48, and the RFC Index). > different. That said, I can live with, although we'd > probably want to call it something else since we usually don't > list addresses for contributors. Address information is optional anyway. > But that would work for me. > >> The other question is whether we need more control on where to >> put these. The way of least resistance would be to >> automatically create a "Contributors" section below the >> Authors section, but I hear people asking for more formatting >> control. > > See my earlier note. I don't think order of sections/ blocks is > really formatting control, but do think that we need a way to > specify where Contributor sections and Index sections (of which > there might, in a better world, be more than one) go. I suspect > that list might get longer as time goes on. The SGML-ish > solution to this (not necessarily as good a match to XML) would > be to introduce a trick element such as (in XML syntax): > > > indexname (%CTEXT;)> > > with obvious future extensibility if more of these turn up. I'm with you in defining a specific container element. However: where does the requirement for Index placement come from? Best regards, Julian From john+xml@jck.com Wed Jun 15 06:38:42 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54CC511E8141 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 06:38:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.274 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.274 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.325, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RrneG20473nV for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 06:38:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50B8111E8126 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 06:38:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=localhost) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1QWqIm-0006Ul-CZ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 09:38:36 -0400 Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 09:38:35 -0400 From: John C Klensin To: Julian Reschke Message-ID: <53E8B8FC6C57F059A2223520@PST.JCK.COM> In-Reply-To: <4DF87E77.20707@gmx.de> References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE68B0.5010603@gmx.de> <4DF87E77.20707@gmx.de> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:38:42 -0000 --On Wednesday, June 15, 2011 11:42 +0200 Julian Reschke wrote: >... >> But... editors are authors for some purposes and not for >> others, so we already have that problem. And contributors >> are not much > > Not the way it works now: you can attach "role=editor" to an > author, but the contact will continue to be considered an > author (for the purpose of citations, AUTH48, and the RFC > Index). Citations, yes, at least until and unless we establish a clear "citations to RFCs" norm that sets whatever rules it sets. Note that, in "normal" bibliographic forms, the (relatively recent) RFC rule that permits Bloggs, F., ed., S. Smith, J. Jones, Some title, ... is simply not allowed. It turns into either Bloggs, F., etc., Some title... (which is what used to happen with RFCs) or Smith, S., J. Jones, Some title, edited by F. Bloggs ... But the common characteristic of all three of those things is that they are RFC Editor decisions about what to pick up and how to use it. Unless things change, those decisions aren't even going to get reviewed this year. I think our concern with XML2RFC ought to be to get the generic markup sufficiently right and specific to allow those RFC Editor decisions to evolve, rather than requiring elaborate heuristics or document-searching if they do. >> different. That said, I can live with, although we'd >> probably want to call it something else since we usually don't >> list addresses for contributors. > > Address information is optional anyway. Sure. But if one is going to paste information in from somewhere else (e.g., as part of a reference retrieved from a library), it may show up -- whether or not to display it should be a question for the style manual (see above) and/or the output processor. >> But that would work for me. >> >>> The other question is whether we need more control on where >>> to put these. The way of least resistance would be to >>> automatically create a "Contributors" section below the >>> Authors section, but I hear people asking for more formatting >>> control. >> >> See my earlier note. I don't think order of sections/ blocks >> is really formatting control, but do think that we need a way >> to specify where Contributor sections and Index sections (of >> which there might, in a better world, be more than one) go. >... > I'm with you in defining a specific container element. > > However: where does the requirement for Index placement come > from? Have a look at draft-hoffman-3536bis. An index to terms in a document like that may be one of the more important types of index in the RFC Series. Now, as you are looking, decide how you feel about its formatting and placement. If you are nearly as repelled as I am, the requirement, and/or the requirement for some additional processing directives, should be clear. To be fair to Paul, the decision to let xml2rfc build the index, rather than building it by hand and putting it in as artwork, was mine. Of course, the artwork model would have caused its own positioning problems, since figures cannot appear in the element. And then there is the production rule index for rfc5321bis, which I can do with your tools, but not with xml2rfc. If one also decided to index other things there, like explanations of commands, one would end up with a need for two separate indexes. Another problem, but also another symptom that index and may need rethinking. john From julian.reschke@gmx.de Wed Jun 15 06:58:50 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D59521F8598 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 06:58:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.487 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.487 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.888, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5FKuyH3fFrfA for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 06:58:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 2441B21F8574 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 06:58:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 15 Jun 2011 13:58:47 -0000 Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.140]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp002) with SMTP; 15 Jun 2011 15:58:47 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+htLI4ovihDIJBP2Wc0gVTzRgmPZyZfpJWxOet+X ZhbLX4yjlloeOn Message-ID: <4DF8BA95.6010900@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 15:58:45 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John C Klensin References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE68B0.5010603@gmx.de> <4DF87E77.20707@gmx.de> <53E8B8FC6C57F059A2223520@PST.JCK.COM> In-Reply-To: <53E8B8FC6C57F059A2223520@PST.JCK.COM> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Keeping some authors off the front page ? X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:58:50 -0000 On 2011-06-15 15:38, John C Klensin wrote: > ... > But the common characteristic of all three of those things is > that they are RFC Editor decisions about what to pick up and how > to use it. Unless things change, those decisions aren't even > going to get reviewed this year. I think our concern with > XML2RFC ought to be to get the generic markup sufficiently right > and specific to allow those RFC Editor decisions to evolve, > rather than requiring elaborate heuristics or document-searching > if they do. > ... Well, if these tool changes came for free, I'd agree. Right now we have xml2rfc.tcl (with nobody except Tony being able to add things), rfc2629.xslt (by me, willing to experiment), and the new tool which is work-in-progress about which I don't know the current status (are the developers reading this???). >>> different. That said, I can live with, although we'd >>> probably want to call it something else since we usually don't >>> list addresses for contributors. >> >> Address information is optional anyway. > > Sure. But if one is going to paste information in from > somewhere else (e.g., as part of a reference retrieved from a > library), it may show up -- whether or not to display it should > be a question for the style manual (see above) and/or the output > processor. That would be inconsistent with how works today. Not sure that it makes sense to diverge from that. > ... >> I'm with you in defining a specific container element. >> >> However: where does the requirement for Index placement come >> from? > > Have a look at draft-hoffman-3536bis. An index to terms in a > document like that may be one of the more important types of > index in the RFC Series. Now, as you are looking, decide how > you feel about its formatting and placement. If you are nearly > as repelled as I am, the requirement, and/or the requirement for I'm not repelled at all. (There are lots of other things about the RFC/ID format I *am* repelled of :-). > some additional processing directives, should be clear. To be > fair to Paul, the decision to let xml2rfc build the index, > rather than building it by hand and putting it in as artwork, > was mine. Of course, the artwork model would have caused its > own positioning problems, since figures cannot appear in the > element. I don't think that building the index using artwork makes sense, unless you can manage to generate it properly including page breaks and page numbers. That being said; the content model for sections inside is the same as inside . > And then there is the production rule index for rfc5321bis, URI? > which I can do with your tools, but not with xml2rfc. If one > also decided to index other things there, like explanations of > commands, one would end up with a need for two separate indexes. > Another problem, but also another symptom that index and > may need rethinking. In HTTPbis, we put production rules under a common element, such as "Grammar productions", and then use subitem for the actual entry... Best regards, Julian From dhc2@dcrocker.net Wed Jun 15 13:34:55 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E30711E809A for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:34:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZA-hCXTOPHU4 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:34:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFCE911E8080 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:34:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.15] (adsl-67-127-56-68.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.127.56.68]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p5FKYjp0027379 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:34:50 -0700 Message-ID: <4DF91765.5040304@dcrocker.net> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:34:45 -0700 From: Dave CROCKER Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Reschke References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE68B0.5010603@gmx.de> <4DF87E77.20707@gmx.de> <53E8B8FC6C57F059A2223520@PST.JCK.COM> <4DF8BA95.6010900@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <4DF8BA95.6010900@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:34:51 -0700 (PDT) Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: [xml2rfc] multiple indexes X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 20:34:55 -0000 On 6/15/2011 6:58 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2011-06-15 15:38, John C Klensin wrote: >> ... >> But the common characteristic of all three of those things is >> that they are RFC Editor decisions about what to pick up and how >> to use it. Unless things change, those decisions aren't even >> going to get reviewed this year. I think our concern with >> XML2RFC ought to be to get the generic markup sufficiently right >> and specific to allow those RFC Editor decisions to evolve, >> rather than requiring elaborate heuristics or document-searching >> if they do. >> ... > > Well, if these tool changes came for free, I'd agree. > > Right now we have xml2rfc.tcl (with nobody except Tony being able to add > things), rfc2629.xslt (by me, willing to experiment), and the new tool which is > work-in-progress about which I don't know the current status (are the developers > reading this???). > >>>> different. That said, I can live with, although we'd >>>> probably want to call it something else since we usually don't >>>> list addresses for contributors. >>> >>> Address information is optional anyway. >> >> Sure. But if one is going to paste information in from >> somewhere else (e.g., as part of a reference retrieved from a >> library), it may show up -- whether or not to display it should >> be a question for the style manual (see above) and/or the output >> processor. > > That would be inconsistent with how works today. Not sure that it makes > sense to diverge from that. > >> ... >>> I'm with you in defining a specific container element. >>> >>> However: where does the requirement for Index placement come >>> from? >> >> Have a look at draft-hoffman-3536bis. An index to terms in a >> document like that may be one of the more important types of >> index in the RFC Series. Now, as you are looking, decide how >> you feel about its formatting and placement. If you are nearly >> as repelled as I am, the requirement, and/or the requirement for ... >> And then there is the production rule index for rfc5321bis, > > URI? (I'm having to force myself away from typing "indices", to conform to the modern "spelling". These inter-generational differences are becoming more and more of a pain...) It probably is worth our considering a set of common indexes for xml2rfc to support, but we should be clear about compelling needs and make sure these are satisfied. If their implementation produces more generalized capabilities, that's fine, but the real goal should be narrower, I suspect. The only two indexes that make particular sense for IETF documents are for vocabulary and for syntax rules. I've no idea how to do the latter, given that they are specified inside artwork, so that embedding extra xml cruft isn't really possible. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From julian.reschke@gmx.de Wed Jun 15 13:42:12 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C311811E8172 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:42:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qDZpU38RR9qG for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:42:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 67AE011E8171 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:42:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 15 Jun 2011 20:42:06 -0000 Received: from p508FAB1B.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.36]) [80.143.171.27] by mail.gmx.net (mp072) with SMTP; 15 Jun 2011 22:42:06 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX186frQ+FfI6+qnc3RD+RafEzVkZSjNZ0wrmMsqAYc YG8gIhS0Z2AM8o Message-ID: <4DF91914.2050200@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 22:41:56 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dcrocker@bbiw.net References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE68B0.5010603@gmx.de> <4DF87E77.20707@gmx.de> <53E8B8FC6C57F059A2223520@PST.JCK.COM> <4DF8BA95.6010900@gmx.de> <4DF91765.5040304@dcrocker.net> In-Reply-To: <4DF91765.5040304@dcrocker.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] multiple indexes X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 20:42:12 -0000 On 2011-06-15 22:34, Dave CROCKER wrote: > ... > (I'm having to force myself away from typing "indices", to conform to > the modern "spelling". These inter-generational differences are becoming > more and more of a pain...) > > > It probably is worth our considering a set of common indexes for xml2rfc > to support, but we should be clear about compelling needs and make sure > these are satisfied. If their implementation produces more generalized > capabilities, that's fine, but the real goal should be narrower, I suspect. > > The only two indexes that make particular sense for IETF documents are > for vocabulary and for syntax rules. > > I've no idea how to do the latter, given that they are specified inside > artwork, so that embedding extra xml cruft isn't really possible. > ... Oh, that's simple; we just need to allow markup inside ; rfc2629.xslt already supports that. Best regards, Julian From randy@psg.com Fri Jun 24 18:53:02 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2946611E810A for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 18:53:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.554 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.554 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.045, BAYES_05=-1.11, J_CHICKENPOX_22=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FRQ4UrIVlzAu for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 18:53:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [147.28.0.36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5C9311E80E8 for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 18:52:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=rair.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QaI29-000Hqv-K1 for xml2rfc@ietf.org; Sat, 25 Jun 2011 01:51:42 +0000 Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2011 10:51:40 +0900 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: xml2rfc list User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [xml2rfc] missing refs X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2011 01:53:02 -0000 i do a nightly rsync /usr/local/bin/rsync -avz --delete-after \ rsync1.xml.resource.org::xml2rfc.bibxml/bibxml/ \ /usr/local/refs/rfc /usr/local/bin/rsync -avz --delete-after \ rsync1.xml.resource.org::xml2rfc.bibxml/bibxml3/ \ /usr/local/refs/id chmod -R og+rX /usr/local/refs today, finishing off a draft, i hit a missing ref, I-D.ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol which is in my internet-drafts rsync directory -rw-rw-r-- 1 randy staff 59025 Jun 12 13:04 ids/draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol-00.txt how am i supposed to debug, report, fix? randy From john+xml@jck.com Sat Jun 25 13:34:17 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6837711E80BE for ; Sat, 25 Jun 2011 13:34:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.339 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.339 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.260, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sMdF1LXSAk+g for ; Sat, 25 Jun 2011 13:34:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A715511E807F for ; Sat, 25 Jun 2011 13:34:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=localhost) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1QaZYO-0007vy-58; Sat, 25 Jun 2011 16:34:08 -0400 Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2011 16:34:07 -0400 From: john+xml@jck.com To: Julian Reschke , dcrocker@bbiw.net Message-ID: <780B22FAF4C0A03CFD4E0FF0@JCK-EEE10> In-Reply-To: <4DF91914.2050200@gmx.de> References: <4DDCAB52.8080103@gmx.de> <0ABEFA6D726F5365AC0E102F@PST.JCK.COM> <4DEB575D.9020400@gmx.de> <4DEE68B0.5010603@gmx.de> <4DF87E77.20707@gmx.de> <53E8B8FC6C57F059A2223520@PST.JCK.COM> <4DF8BA95.6010900@gmx.de> <4DF91765.5040304@dcrocker.net> <4DF91914.2050200@gmx.de> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org, RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] multiple indexes X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2011 20:34:17 -0000 --On Wednesday, 15 June, 2011 22:41 +0200 Julian Reschke wrote: >> The only two indexes that make particular sense for IETF >> documents are for vocabulary and for syntax rules. I believe Dave is correct about that. I think I could imagine other cases, but they would be pretty obscure, probably so obscure as to not be worth the effort. >> I've no idea how to do the latter, given that they are >> specified inside artwork, so that embedding extra xml cruft >> isn't really possible. ... > > Oh, that's simple; we just need to allow markup inside > ; rfc2629.xslt already supports that. Once upon a time, I was involved in a standard that used a lot of metalanguage, actually more complex than ABNF, and that was done in SGML. After experimenting with several variations on what we would now call " with markup", we concluded that the only thing that would actually work was to define an element structure that would capture a single rule and actually separate out all of the terms and operators. A simplified version in more xml-ish form, the result would look something like "0" / "1" / "2" / "3" / "4" / "5" / "6" / "7" / "8" / "9" In the original, each term of the RHS actually got its own element with the operators specified as arguments to that element. That permits all sorts of interesting things, including style sheet (or output processor) decisions as to whether to use "=" or "::=" (or special typography), "/" or "|" or "OR" (or special typography), as well as making cross-reference indices (I have the same problem Dave does; have to force myself to write "indexes" every time and, at least for the present, just stopped). But, for our purposes, I don't think the extra flexibility is needed, it is lots more work, and I could live with markup in artwork. john From randy@psg.com Sun Jun 26 14:16:04 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF97421F84DD for ; Sun, 26 Jun 2011 14:16:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MXlH5eaXZfmW for ; Sun, 26 Jun 2011 14:16:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [147.28.0.36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EC0E21F84DA for ; Sun, 26 Jun 2011 14:16:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=rair.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QawfI-000NfP-51 for xml2rfc@ietf.org; Sun, 26 Jun 2011 21:14:48 +0000 Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 06:14:47 +0900 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: xml2rfc list User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [xml2rfc] missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2011 21:16:05 -0000 i am hitting more and more missing ref files. i am starting to suspect that they are for draft-ietf-wg---00s, but am not sure. this is starting to become painful. anyone with clue? randy From ahagens@amsl.com Mon Jun 27 06:57:53 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 282AC11E80CB for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 06:57:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_22=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XuxupyVkwGEC for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 06:57:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (mail.amsl.com [64.170.98.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A49311E80D9 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 06:57:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c1a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDBCB1C3852B; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 06:57:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c1a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c1a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZUcWmQxrf5qD; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 06:57:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc2.home (pool-72-66-107-92.washdc.fios.verizon.net [72.66.107.92]) by c1a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2B8F11C38517; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 06:57:44 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 From: Alice Hagens In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 09:57:42 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> References: To: Randy Bush X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: xml2rfc list , RFC Editor Subject: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 13:57:53 -0000 Randy, We have been having an issue with rsync1.xml.resource.org for 2 months: = In bibxml (RFCs), the most recent files we have are from 21 April. In = bibxml3 (I-Ds), the most recent files are from 25 April (seems your = issue is similar since you don't have recent -00s). More recent files (e.g., = http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6144.xml of = 28-Apr-2011, = http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-sidr-bgpsec-= protocol.xml of 11-Jun-2011) are available via URL*, but not in our = rsync'd repository. =20 * So a work-around is using the full URL in the ENTITY form reference in = your XML file. For example: then &bgpsec;) xml.resource.org states: > rsync access is available at two independent servers = (rsync1.xml.resource.org::xml2rfc.bibxml, = andrsync3.xml.resource.org::xml2rfc.bibxml) =97 after you pick one, you = shouldn't switch.=20 We have not tried rsync3. Thanks, Alice for the RFC Production Center On Jun 26, 2011, at 5:14 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > i am hitting more and more missing ref files. i am starting to = suspect > that they are for draft-ietf-wg---00s, but am not sure. this is > starting to become painful. >=20 > anyone with clue? >=20 > randy > _______________________________________________ > xml2rfc mailing list > xml2rfc@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc >=20 On Jun 24, 2011, at 9:51 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > i do a nightly rsync >=20 > /usr/local/bin/rsync -avz --delete-after \ > rsync1.xml.resource.org::xml2rfc.bibxml/bibxml/ \ > /usr/local/refs/rfc > /usr/local/bin/rsync -avz --delete-after \ > rsync1.xml.resource.org::xml2rfc.bibxml/bibxml3/ \ > /usr/local/refs/id > chmod -R og+rX /usr/local/refs >=20 > today, finishing off a draft, i hit a missing ref, >=20 > I-D.ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol >=20 > which is in my internet-drafts rsync directory >=20 > -rw-rw-r-- 1 randy staff 59025 Jun 12 13:04 = ids/draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol-00.txt >=20 > how am i supposed to debug, report, fix? >=20 > randy > _______________________________________________ > xml2rfc mailing list > xml2rfc@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc >=20 From nico@cryptonector.com Mon Jun 27 07:10:50 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1992621F85CC for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 07:10:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rym5qim1RWfY for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 07:10:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a30.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcbhh.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.177]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94C2021F857B for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 07:10:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a30.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a30.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4455021DE7D for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 07:10:46 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cryptonector.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s= cryptonector.com; b=AstKK1hXILljOPDtztRjb2mO5m+DbYw52PYCm0KH5KTF iI0L1DhUtI0jGsNUTqlLDImEpyMmp2A9z2oMY1wYNH6BVQ1Vhe8N9bB+uDwPOSmD nkh6nKn+XS3kEzZXQ/ZOeXcZlqEPDBuaX4+quIamtK9RXqiaGOPfgFMyC2zB0rE= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= cryptonector.com; bh=H9Xd+2rGxKR21pclyeXjybjUV04=; b=lQ0B6ShEuEF dop3o3nQLS4f24zS4uFEaDjKFyQE08FIOLUg48BOmk1h4sPM8kw3Aejox06WBKmV kuF9XNX75LOnG39DjywSUVhp7fDyJfBiTWRN9sJeCgW1kd9s78QNKHJa0ijcbwaG USkHnJJycGU3rvitDnjrEH2ucO/VzbWg= Received: from mail-pz0-f44.google.com (mail-pz0-f44.google.com [209.85.210.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a30.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 13F1921DE65 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 07:10:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pzk5 with SMTP id 5so3234511pzk.31 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 07:10:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.22.135 with SMTP id d7mr2778342pbf.408.1309183845715; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 07:10:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.41.167 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 07:10:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 09:10:45 -0500 Message-ID: From: Nico Williams To: Alice Hagens Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: xml2rfc list , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 14:10:50 -0000 On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Alice Hagens wrote: > * So a work-around is using the full URL in the ENTITY form reference in = your XML file. For example: =C2=A0 = then &bgpsec;) That's what I do, and it works out great. I'd like xml2rfc to have a better way to handle this, so I'd not have to specify the location of these references and instead xml2rfc could just figure it out (try a local location configured or baked in, then try the public reference repo). That would make it much easier to write .xmls that can be submitted as-is and work for all. Nico -- From julian.reschke@gmx.de Mon Jun 27 07:25:23 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B95411E80D5 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 07:25:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-4.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ph1LJuistD9v for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 07:25:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id EB92011E80D3 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 07:25:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 27 Jun 2011 14:25:19 -0000 Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.140]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp058) with SMTP; 27 Jun 2011 16:25:19 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/2uboXOvj2TfHx/QlEFP5JkFblXK3DwDGNBD6CnQ eBZ1SiPmToxj8W Message-ID: <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 16:25:18 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nico Williams References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: xml2rfc list , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 14:25:23 -0000 On 2011-06-27 16:10, Nico Williams wrote: > On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Alice Hagens wrote: >> * So a work-around is using the full URL in the ENTITY form reference in your XML file. For example: then&bgpsec;) > > That's what I do, and it works out great. > > I'd like xml2rfc to have a better way to handle this, so I'd not have > to specify the location of these references and instead xml2rfc could > just figure it out (try a local location configured or baked in, then > try the public reference repo). That would make it much easier to > write .xmls that can be submitted as-is and work for all. > ... I wouldn't want to trade predictability vs convenience. My preference is to actually *copy* the reference entries into my source. That way, the document is stand-alone, and will yield the same TXT independently of when and where it's generated. Best regards, Julian From petithug@acm.org Mon Jun 27 09:01:15 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90BEA21F85F1 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 09:01:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1qvyc5CBmmO2 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 09:01:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from implementers.org (implementers.org [IPv6:2604:3400:dc1:41:216:3eff:fe5b:8240]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B750821F85EB for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 09:01:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [IPv6:2001:55c:4c15:5f80:213:d4ff:fe04:3e08] (unknown [IPv6:2001:55c:4c15:5f80:213:d4ff:fe04:3e08]) by implementers.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CFD0F226E9; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 18:00:48 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E08A946.8000602@acm.org> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 09:01:10 -0700 From: Marc Petit-Huguenin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110626 Iceowl/1.0b2 Icedove/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Reschke References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: xml2rfc list Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 16:01:15 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 06/27/2011 07:25 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2011-06-27 16:10, Nico Williams wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Alice Hagens wrote: >>> * So a work-around is using the full URL in the ENTITY form reference in your >>> XML file. For example:>> 'http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol.xml'> >>> then&bgpsec;) >> >> That's what I do, and it works out great. >> >> I'd like xml2rfc to have a better way to handle this, so I'd not have >> to specify the location of these references and instead xml2rfc could >> just figure it out (try a local location configured or baked in, then >> try the public reference repo). That would make it much easier to >> write .xmls that can be submitted as-is and work for all. >> ... > > I wouldn't want to trade predictability vs convenience. > > My preference is to actually *copy* the reference entries into my source. That > way, the document is stand-alone, and will yield the same TXT independently of > when and where it's generated. Yes, and this is, IMO, what people should do for XML documents before submitting them to the IETF, so other format can later be generated with the correct references. I wrote a tool that is doing exactly this. The document author uses URNs, and the tool generates a stand alone XML file. Here's an example from a draft I recently published: The next step was to use a cache for the resolution, but I have yet to implement that. There is more explanations on my blog, see in my signature below. - -- Marc Petit-Huguenin Personal email: marc@petit-huguenin.org Professional email: petithug@acm.org Blog: http://blog.marc.petit-huguenin.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk4IqUQACgkQ9RoMZyVa61feCwCeNJf4ip72Ep420WsshbMYi8i8 w5IAn1MfBnaohhfrTKdZ9r6tuS0iZypq =ff5w -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From randy@psg.com Mon Jun 27 13:02:42 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2D6C11E8119 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 13:02:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KaGLb2wcELVX for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 13:02:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [147.28.0.36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 610D911E810B for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 13:02:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=rair.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QbHzl-000BKv-Qs; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 20:01:22 +0000 Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 05:01:20 +0900 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: Alice Hagens In-Reply-To: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: xml2rfc list , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 20:02:42 -0000 > xml.resource.org states: >> rsync access is available at two independent servers >> (rsync1.xml.resource.org::xml2rfc.bibxml, >> andrsync3.xml.resource.org::xml2rfc.bibxml) =E2=80=94 after you pick one, >> you shouldn't switch. bingo! 3 works for me. thank you thank you. randy From Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com Mon Jun 27 16:20:04 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 517D121F8527 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 16:20:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.265 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.265 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1hEcuNrvGoLb for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 16:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oproxy6-pub.bluehost.com (oproxy6-pub.bluehost.com [67.222.54.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id CFA7221F8525 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 16:20:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 13090 invoked by uid 0); 27 Jun 2011 23:20:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box514.bluehost.com) (74.220.219.114) by cpoproxy3.bluehost.com with SMTP; 27 Jun 2011 23:20:00 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=kingsmountain.com; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Identified-User; b=DD1SMHNAgzvwnZjKm0lXjxRCIl9Wz9blR/FPNst2hg8Z9iPS7L3gi5VJUzKjnutOrJ/YxcSrA5oUBp8XPFq9Z4h6IArXzA/x5fJVm0KisUa2hTrDo0Jnl5d6aaWa2Evl; Received: from outbound4.ebay.com ([216.113.168.128] helo=[10.244.137.150]) by box514.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QbL60-0002gn-7F for xml2rfc@ietf.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 17:20:00 -0600 Message-ID: <4E09101F.40807@KingsMountain.com> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 16:19:59 -0700 From: =JeffH User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110424 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: xml2rfc list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Identified-User: {11025:box514.bluehost.com:kingsmou:kingsmountain.com} {sentby:smtp auth 216.113.168.128 authed with jeff.hodges+kingsmountain.com} Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:20:04 -0000 > On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Alice Hagens wrote: >> * So a work-around is using the full URL in the ENTITY form reference in your XML file. For example: then &bgpsec;) > > That's what I do, and it works out great. +1 > I'd like xml2rfc to have a better way to handle this, so I'd not have > to specify the location of these references and instead xml2rfc could > just figure it out (try a local location configured or baked in, then > try the public reference repo). That would make it much easier to > write .xmls that can be submitted as-is and work for all. +1 =JeffH From nico@cryptonector.com Mon Jun 27 21:37:18 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1959921F84CB for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 21:37:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.31 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.31 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.333, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vIu8BxfeQAo7 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 21:37:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a74.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcahe.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.74]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 972EA21F84C6 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 21:37:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a74.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a74.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFC0C67C06D for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 21:37:09 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cryptonector.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s= cryptonector.com; b=G9+WgvGN8bDYog1dXz5ywJYPwQZEMG0qWo3pnE6WwVHj c74VMsV32N/jXolCKQTYvSY31i+6lEx7u2DOdFTl8LBM5bWcFUON+mfVuwDZKQQe 5GD/aytlp4TW0+Euv7hCWqbXUlYContJ5+SM4vpnhVac+8xyWNe+fgNqICiYG6A= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= cryptonector.com; bh=rB2tExZZolBsTEcowzP+qhoTHwU=; b=FdPizcZtz3K em3Hc264osLlMArRCieK8LyYfpaRkk3ZmJzB17a3CosjmfqcScAEpro72nA/OGnw RM8jX3d0caTl8Cw2YAiJwb/BvMyFldr/zEdN+pTJ/g62yXeq/vutZEw1sgGg+T+Y ozD/rzR387sImI181KRWEp9/415b99bc= Received: from mail-pz0-f44.google.com (mail-pz0-f44.google.com [209.85.210.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a74.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D24CF67C06B for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 21:37:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pzk5 with SMTP id 5so3651211pzk.31 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 21:37:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.33.8 with SMTP id n8mr2057638pbi.207.1309235829550; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 21:37:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.41.167 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 21:37:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:37:09 -0500 Message-ID: From: Nico Williams To: Julian Reschke Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: xml2rfc list , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 04:37:18 -0000 On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Julian Reschke wro= te: > On 2011-06-27 16:10, Nico Williams wrote: >> I'd like xml2rfc to have a better way to handle this, so I'd not have >> to specify the location of these references and instead xml2rfc could >> just figure it out (try a local location configured or baked in, then >> try the public reference repo). =C2=A0That would make it much easier to >> write .xmls that can be submitted as-is and work for all. >> ... > > I wouldn't want to trade predictability vs convenience. > > My preference is to actually *copy* the reference entries into my source. > That way, the document is stand-alone, and will yield the same TXT > independently of when and where it's generated. I don't like that at all. I mind not mind an option that outputs an XML that includes references inline, or an archive that includes the xml source and the reference files needed to render that xml. But I want an authoritative repository of references, not one I maintain by hand. This is 2011, for goodness' sake's! Nico -- From randy@psg.com Mon Jun 27 23:28:19 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CF4F21F8654 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:28:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.949 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.650, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fnoz5LiYBezZ for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:28:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [147.28.0.36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22F2821F8651 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:28:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=rair.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QbRlE-0009LC-Ec; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 06:27:00 +0000 Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:26:59 +0900 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: Nico Williams In-Reply-To: References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: xml2rfc list , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 06:28:19 -0000 >> My preference is to actually *copy* the reference entries into my source. >> That way, the document is stand-alone, and will yield the same TXT >> independently of when and where it's generated. > > I don't like that at all. I mind not mind an option that outputs an > XML that includes references inline, or an archive that includes the > xml source and the reference files needed to render that xml. But I > want an authoritative repository of references, not one I maintain by > hand. This is 2011, for goodness' sake's! +1 From duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp Mon Jun 27 23:28:45 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A21E21F8651 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:28:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -99.79 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.79 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iCETtqDZRCU0 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:28:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from acintmta02.acbb.aoyama.ac.jp (acintmta02.acbb.aoyama.ac.jp [133.2.20.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56B5121F864F for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:28:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from acmse02.acbb.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.20.226]) by acintmta02.acbb.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id p5S6SXfw008924 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:28:33 +0900 Received: from (unknown [133.2.206.133]) by acmse02.acbb.aoyama.ac.jp with smtp id 5330_317f_d8dd4fd6_a14f_11e0_87e0_001d0969ab06; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:28:33 +0900 Received: from [IPv6:::1] ([133.2.210.5]:49914) by itmail.it.aoyama.ac.jp with [XMail 1.22 ESMTP Server] id for from ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:28:29 +0900 Message-ID: <4E097478.8030200@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:28:08 +0900 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_J=2E_D=FCrst=22?= Organization: Aoyama Gakuin University User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100722 Eudora/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Reschke References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: xml2rfc list , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 06:28:45 -0000 On 2011/06/27 23:25, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2011-06-27 16:10, Nico Williams wrote: > I wouldn't want to trade predictability vs convenience. > > My preference is to actually *copy* the reference entries into my > source. That way, the document is stand-alone, and will yield the same > TXT independently of when and where it's generated. > > Best regards, Julian That's also my preference. It works even on a flight or when the connection is down temporarily. Regards, Martin. From randy@psg.com Mon Jun 27 23:30:00 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53CFE21F8667 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:30:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.016 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.016 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.283, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XMva9uSEq62N for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:30:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [147.28.0.36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0229621F8651 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:30:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=rair.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QbRo4-000AKO-DL; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 06:29:56 +0000 Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:29:54 +0900 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_J=2E_D=FCrst=22?= In-Reply-To: <4E097478.8030200@it.aoyama.ac.jp> References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> <4E097478.8030200@it.aoyama.ac.jp> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: xml2rfc list , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 06:30:00 -0000 >> My preference is to actually *copy* the reference entries into my >> source. That way, the document is stand-alone, and will yield the >> same TXT independently of when and where it's generated. > That's also my preference. It works even on a flight or when the > connection is down temporarily. notice the word 'rsync' in the $subject? randy From julian.reschke@gmx.de Mon Jun 27 23:57:00 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22C9E21F86BF for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:57:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SoOjK9IPVYDX for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:56:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 413AC21F86BD for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:56:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 28 Jun 2011 06:56:51 -0000 Received: from p508F9B1B.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.36]) [80.143.155.27] by mail.gmx.net (mp067) with SMTP; 28 Jun 2011 08:56:51 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18Yilgg7rYYcsPz81CrZM++YtfrYgDKR3BhWsJ4zs RrFHVkcnlzAJP8 Message-ID: <4E097B31.4030602@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 08:56:49 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nico Williams References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: xml2rfc list , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 06:57:00 -0000 On 2011-06-28 06:37, Nico Williams wrote: > On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: >> On 2011-06-27 16:10, Nico Williams wrote: >>> I'd like xml2rfc to have a better way to handle this, so I'd not have >>> to specify the location of these references and instead xml2rfc could >>> just figure it out (try a local location configured or baked in, then >>> try the public reference repo). That would make it much easier to >>> write .xmls that can be submitted as-is and work for all. >>> ... >> >> I wouldn't want to trade predictability vs convenience. >> >> My preference is to actually *copy* the reference entries into my source. >> That way, the document is stand-alone, and will yield the same TXT >> independently of when and where it's generated. > > I don't like that at all. I mind not mind an option that outputs an > XML that includes references inline, or an archive that includes the > xml source and the reference files needed to render that xml. But I > want an authoritative repository of references, not one I maintain by > hand. This is 2011, for goodness' sake's! I don't argue against the repository, I argue about requiring it to be *online* while transforming. Best regards, Julian From julian.reschke@gmx.de Mon Jun 27 23:58:09 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A425021F86C7 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:58:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id znUZRHsjIg2L for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:58:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id CFF7021F86C4 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:58:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 28 Jun 2011 06:58:07 -0000 Received: from p508F9B1B.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.36]) [80.143.155.27] by mail.gmx.net (mp065) with SMTP; 28 Jun 2011 08:58:07 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19so0kOqrxsl+ozPtpWH5zWSx+o9vxJEQNoLQiYvk +CB4ZHDKYR7aYu Message-ID: <4E097B7B.8040006@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 08:58:03 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Randy Bush References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> <4E097478.8030200@it.aoyama.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: xml2rfc list , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 06:58:09 -0000 On 2011-06-28 08:29, Randy Bush wrote: >>> My preference is to actually *copy* the reference entries into my >>> source. That way, the document is stand-alone, and will yield the >>> same TXT independently of when and where it's generated. >> That's also my preference. It works even on a flight or when the >> connection is down temporarily. > > notice the word 'rsync' in the $subject? That still implies that any "consumer* of the XML version has a copy of the repository... From nico@cryptonector.com Tue Jun 28 06:26:39 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9B3D11E8098 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 06:26:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2tq4IXr8DRJC for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 06:26:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a16.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcaib.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BD4A22800E for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 06:26:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a16.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a16.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4B8E508089 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 06:26:32 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cryptonector.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc: content-type; q=dns; s=cryptonector.com; b=Zfwc3IhcNqI0R+paMindZ Ot3ja0n1JkKUy3vUNN/6PZ0k7k4JRcLXefScT22TniByOZQn7sHpSM9OsHV5OOKf d2qF67IGXEcXsY+PZNP93ktula4UUzLB3gEymxX4RGjSEMp47g2aOD3/gOZwJ0TE 3SNx9XTKcSb5hwlHSTkac0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type; s=cryptonector.com; bh=aDRQ8Q5IimKNDwzlpTNb i4hx6P0=; b=pmic9BbkfPBZjVzRnMNJTJ5v41raD2hhlDoDjKokYkwalQiW3jdh mua8cNLBve0c5Tgn7kSSGmWZ8JKwyr3E1egHwXJ/q6nhurs9wAb1HTAZwtxPRpdN 5TbRzKdjo2KdUeJaElU6VA1xlNXtNOOOEqUE4R8z4W/QrwR5NwIZ6l0= Received: from mail-pz0-f54.google.com (mail-pz0-f54.google.com [209.85.210.54]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a16.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A497F508087 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 06:26:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pzk27 with SMTP id 27so194915pzk.27 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 06:26:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.22.135 with SMTP id d7mr3435459pbf.408.1309267592188; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 06:26:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.41.167 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 06:26:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E097B31.4030602@gmx.de> References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> <4E097B31.4030602@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 08:26:31 -0500 Message-ID: From: Nico Williams To: Julian Reschke Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: xml2rfc list , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 13:26:39 -0000 On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 1:56 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > I don't argue against the repository, I argue about requiring it to be > *online* while transforming. This is why I keep a local copy of the DNS. Also wikipedia. Also everything else. Copying references into the xml source is so /etc/hosts, so 1984. Online infrastructure is a fact of life in 2011. Nico -- From mcr@sandelman.ca Tue Jun 28 05:44:35 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28E3021F8597 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 05:44:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.954 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.954 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HcHrqcxFbydx for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 05:44:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [67.23.6.41]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E06421F859D for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 05:44:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from marajade.sandelman.ca (wlan204.sandelman.ca [209.87.252.204]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D336C34051; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 08:44:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from marajade.sandelman.ca (marajade.sandelman.ca [127.0.0.1]) by marajade.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08E4998AC2; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 08:44:34 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Richardson To: Julian Reschke In-Reply-To: <4E097B31.4030602@gmx.de> References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> <4E097B31.4030602@gmx.de> X-Mailer: MH-E 8.1; nmh 1.3-dev; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 22) Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 08:44:33 -0400 Message-ID: <8375.1309265073@marajade.sandelman.ca> Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 07:30:22 -0700 Cc: xml2rfc list , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 12:44:35 -0000 >>>>> "Julian" == Julian Reschke writes: >> I don't like that at all. I mind not mind an option that outputs >> an XML that includes references inline, or an archive that >> includes the xml source and the reference files needed to render >> that xml. But I want an authoritative repository of references, >> not one I maintain by hand. This is 2011, for goodness' sake's! Julian> I don't argue against the repository, I argue about Julian> requiring it to be *online* while transforming. Some years ago I did some patches such that xml2rfc had a search path while looking for references. This allowed me to keep a local copy (for offline, and much faster work), but still put the official URL into my document. At the time, there was nobody who could accept my patches. I can try again. -- ] He who is tired of Weird Al is tired of life! | firewalls [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON |net architect[ ] mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[ Kyoto Plus: watch the video then sign the petition. From paul.hoffman@vpnc.org Tue Jun 28 07:35:12 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA5AF11E810D for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 07:35:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BL++xt12udYI for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 07:35:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 598D011E80BE for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 07:35:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.20.30.101] (50-0-66-4.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.0.66.4] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p5SEYnSg075035 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 28 Jun 2011 07:34:50 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Paul Hoffman In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 07:34:54 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <186137DD-39C8-4B8A-89B2-C9BB0B950C0B@vpnc.org> References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> To: Nico Williams X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: xml2rfc list Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:35:12 -0000 On Jun 27, 2011, at 9:37 PM, Nico Williams wrote: > But I > want an authoritative repository of references, not one I maintain by > hand. This is 2011, for goodness' sake's! It's fine that you want that, but it's not what we have. resource.org is = a voluntary service. At some point in the future, the IETF might support = a replacement that will have different service level agreements.= From nico@cryptonector.com Tue Jun 28 07:54:28 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C46221F85A8 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 07:54:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.777 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.777 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.800, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id re4cAJzqGzuE for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 07:54:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a24.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdccah.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.207]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72E6121F85A2 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 07:54:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a24.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a24.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 173072C8082 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 07:54:27 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cryptonector.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s= cryptonector.com; b=I99Hf9gnygTNX9wUYFBJIrQz3goAHxbj+/BKAfEP+i1n 9Hr9OlhZmQvPbt7Hcf9NACvFUlEhCZmXsl9IKoBUgHFivucm1wO1oUwFlKOIDbJa TskIYUHS04P5nxfF0ZuA0gWiOL3yDGdrJF1leKgM3Y40MqQ0XntcpSxO42Nmvb4= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= cryptonector.com; bh=h6JYbpiRAnqkt3kF1lyBMn5OP0Y=; b=a21idkOubBU eZgR97ZfWc3Lh8EB5WUVji3CuYF1e414AADB0vhXlTjUXW+MTJ9mlS5mNMsmjUPh iKQF0eLD3K+EWqBD16MCCJB2xizx+BbO1viOmqjbP5gUrPJbFs0b3lrGh/7MrnDt KXQbBlXQ9yFnOAENAwT06kjbp3t3dWXs= Received: from mail-pw0-f44.google.com (mail-pw0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a24.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C51F02C8075 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 07:54:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pwj5 with SMTP id 5so235267pwj.31 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 07:54:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.33.38 with SMTP id o6mr222534pbi.73.1309272866481; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 07:54:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.41.167 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 07:54:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <186137DD-39C8-4B8A-89B2-C9BB0B950C0B@vpnc.org> References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> <186137DD-39C8-4B8A-89B2-C9BB0B950C0B@vpnc.org> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:54:26 -0500 Message-ID: From: Nico Williams To: Paul Hoffman Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: xml2rfc list Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:54:28 -0000 On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote= : > On Jun 27, 2011, at 9:37 PM, Nico Williams wrote: > >> But I >> want an authoritative repository of references, not one I maintain by >> hand. =C2=A0This is 2011, for goodness' sake's! > > It's fine that you want that, but it's not what we have. resource.org is = a voluntary service. At some point in the future, the IETF might support a = replacement that will have different service level agreements. If the current service stopped working we could make do -- worst case scenario we'd all cobble together our own references entries from the actual RFCs, I-Ds, etcetera that we want to reference. Also, this is hardly a critical service. Therefore I would say that any lack of SLA does not change the reality that this service *exists* and has been working quite reliably for years. I'm willing to chance using the references repository. Indeed, I fully intend to continue using it, at my own risk (quick, I better up my life insurance policy! :) Moreover, the fact that the service is not supported (is it?) is hardly a reason for *not* building support for it into the tool -it's already there-, much less for ripping it out (that might risk a peasant's revolt the likes of which we've not seen in centuries). Nico -- From randy@psg.com Tue Jun 28 08:13:54 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8076321F860C for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 08:13:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r2RKGL58fhnn for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 08:13:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD22121F84D5 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 08:13:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=rair.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QbZz4-0000N7-1m; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:13:50 +0000 Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 00:13:48 +0900 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: Paul Hoffman In-Reply-To: <186137DD-39C8-4B8A-89B2-C9BB0B950C0B@vpnc.org> References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> <186137DD-39C8-4B8A-89B2-C9BB0B950C0B@vpnc.org> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: xml2rfc list Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:13:54 -0000 > It's fine that you want that, but it's not what we have. resource.org > is a voluntary service. At some point in the future, the IETF might > support a replacement that will have different service level > agreements. some of us are old enough to remember that the internet is a voluntary service. and cache2 and cache3 are at tools, fwiw. randy From hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com Thu Jun 30 01:49:18 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 305C821F8746 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 01:49:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RtRbwcxptD6I for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 01:49:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pv0-f172.google.com (mail-pv0-f172.google.com [74.125.83.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B176421F872C for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 01:49:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pvh18 with SMTP id 18so1994797pvh.31 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 01:49:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=tO4fuIqAadiYyrWK9DO9ZlNpfXvL2cr8NJZsFHv19V0=; b=chghWujglqdqC31iL0pmvJXEGiX8qsA3ySCsfeInhKai1OwjUycFkJd9SFBvJ2kTy8 TGuAurwBIQ7w6HMc0Nr5RXGGi1K7vMhrFT7/hdgmeFduCMVlM8suyJk1gy7rkwOSNE5P aaf4osCthZYCvLWBCUeGaLXg+sa2zz/rM0ZMA= Received: by 10.143.21.32 with SMTP id y32mr875571wfi.95.1309423757347; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 01:49:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.89.6 with HTTP; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 01:48:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> <4E097B31.4030602@gmx.de> From: Frank Ellermann Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 10:48:57 +0200 Message-ID: To: Nico Williams Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:49:18 -0000 On 28 June 2011 15:26, Nico Williams wrote: > Copying references into the xml source is so /etc/hosts, so 1984. As long as I can convince my OS that my favourite text editor has write access on /etc/hosts this is doubleclick analytics 2011 IpV6 ::1, and quite the opposite of 1984 ;-) Seriously, what Julian and Martin wrote is based on how XML entities are supposed to work. For "us" xml2rfc is only a tool and should work without locally expanded bibxml snippets (presumably changing several times until a draft is published as RFC). IOW what "we" want is in theory wrong, in practice it's fine if you know the limitation: no XML tool without online access on the bibxml repo can actually do anything useful with the bibxml snippets (apart from checking their syntax). Copying the repo as suggested by Randy is not an option over slow or expensive connections and/or with limited disk space. -Frank From nico@cryptonector.com Thu Jun 30 09:59:38 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BA4311E8148 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 09:59:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.548 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.571, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2MqFEyl7gIQR for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 09:59:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a26.g.dreamhost.com (mailbigip.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.5]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB7B111E8092 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 09:59:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from homiemail-a26.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a26.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85D0EB8076 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 09:59:37 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cryptonector.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s= cryptonector.com; b=C32yU97ejXEd6DKHIvBS4T3c8rMCzeHr/ZNOCfSFG60U WsTUwQ1xsbigCQcsTNuXS803O9gUkf36RvHCmRmKO/4PLAEDToHbDo9qKFsoCYIY dKRSwlweTAXC7j3SwRzknOWX9MiKylI4EYyxzUegwO5LvDSboC9IIRNLIWU4oEw= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= cryptonector.com; bh=zyzuC6nrUCTgXthyPo/ieQYsIfU=; b=a+FyUo+XpU1 EUjFZZ1tIN6BvmhR1w3n0WszgCE1iC/Red9ATN/6lL7cFH/IUi6EwRVmK7ui56hM Q7bGr7bFxdJ+4R4gMvog4OwLzZdcdZFp09PQN/5dR6qFmAqBwt6xkL2MSO23u1h2 /qOmDR5gA6n+i9oajdjWw1DkEjN7AVaE= Received: from mail-pz0-f44.google.com (mail-pz0-f44.google.com [209.85.210.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a26.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 73EB8B8056 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 09:59:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pzk5 with SMTP id 5so2718909pzk.31 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 09:59:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.13.230 with SMTP id k6mr2675198pbc.341.1309453177112; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 09:59:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.41.167 with HTTP; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 09:59:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> <4E097B31.4030602@gmx.de> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 11:59:37 -0500 Message-ID: From: Nico Williams To: Frank Ellermann Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:59:38 -0000 On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 3:48 AM, Frank Ellermann wrote: > On 28 June 2011 15:26, Nico Williams wrote: > >> Copying references into the xml source is so /etc/hosts, so 1984. > > As long as I can convince my OS that my favourite text editor has write > access on /etc/hosts this is doubleclick analytics 2011 IpV6 ::1, and > quite the opposite of 1984 ;-) :) > Seriously, what Julian and Martin wrote is based on how XML entities > are supposed to work. =C2=A0For "us" xml2rfc is only a tool and should wo= rk > without locally expanded bibxml snippets (presumably changing several > times until a draft is published as RFC). =C2=A0IOW what "we" want is in > theory wrong, in practice it's fine if you know the limitation: no XML > tool without online access on the bibxml repo can actually do anything > useful with the bibxml snippets (apart from checking their syntax). Before xml2rfc I used to write I-Ds as manually formatted, but not paginated, text, which I'd then paginate (and stamp boilerplates on) via a pagination script I wrote myself. Heck, I could use LyX, render as text, then use such a script again (or figure out how to get LaTeX to output perfect I-Ds). But guess what: xml2rfc is better because it's code that we all can use, and because it solves all sorts of annoying little problems. Finding and keeping references up to date is one of the most important and useful features of xml2rfc -- dropping it (either from xml2rfc itself, or from our habits) is simply out of the question. Analogies to many other modern conceniences that yes, we can do without, are trivial, and in all cases we don't give up on modern conveniences just because *sometimes* they're not available to us. Yes please, let's be serious. Specifically, let's not be luddites or, more precisely, let the luddites among us do as they wish, but don't force the rest of us to live what would now be an ascetic lifestyle to us. > Copying the repo as suggested by Randy is not an option over slow or > expensive connections and/or with limited disk space. Disk space is hardly limited any more. And the initial copy is the only slow operation. Also, I seem to remember something about how the network can optimize things when using HTTP... But I digress from my point above. Nico -- From tony.li@tony.li Thu Jun 30 12:05:36 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE7CB11E807A for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 12:05:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hWDOuMBboxnR for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 12:05:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from qmta09.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta09.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.96]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFD6B11E807D for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 12:05:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omta18.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.74]) by qmta09.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 2K3y1h0081bwxycA9K5ZfQ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 19:05:33 +0000 Received: from [10.155.34.162] ([128.107.239.233]) by omta18.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 2K5r1h00V52qHCY8eK5xy4; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 19:06:18 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Tony Li In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 12:04:59 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> <4E097B31.4030602@gmx.de> To: Nico Williams X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 19:05:36 -0000 On Jun 30, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Nico Williams wrote: > Yes please, let's be serious. Specifically, let's not be luddites or, > more precisely, let the luddites among us do as they wish, but don't > force the rest of us to live what would now be an ascetic lifestyle to > us. There's an old saying that all problems in computer science can be = solved with another level of indirection. Is there some way that we = could apply that here? Tony From julian.reschke@gmx.de Thu Jun 30 15:12:07 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93F6C11E81AC for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:12:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.144 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.144 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.545, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4ywhJ2E+qQVJ for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:12:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id ABF8A21F86F1 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:11:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 30 Jun 2011 22:11:20 -0000 Received: from p508FA84A.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.36]) [80.143.168.74] by mail.gmx.net (mp059) with SMTP; 01 Jul 2011 00:11:20 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18oWFFzB+wowOit3rJzWcEqpoChYEAmRHZKASpBej 90vhsp+S3j2imI Message-ID: <4E0CF485.1050206@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 00:11:17 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tony Li References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> <4E097B31.4030602@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 22:12:07 -0000 On 2011-06-30 21:04, Tony Li wrote: > > On Jun 30, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Nico Williams wrote: > >> Yes please, let's be serious. Specifically, let's not be luddites or, >> more precisely, let the luddites among us do as they wish, but don't >> force the rest of us to live what would now be an ascetic lifestyle to >> us. > > > There's an old saying that all problems in computer science can be solved with another level of indirection. Is there some way that we could apply that here? > ... Except the one of having too many indirections. From dzonatas@gmail.com Thu Jun 30 16:13:04 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9107411E8107 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:13:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.927 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.927 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.328, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NMICMFcjrQFB for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:13:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pv0-f172.google.com (mail-pv0-f172.google.com [74.125.83.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C071A11E80F8 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:13:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pvh18 with SMTP id 18so2907359pvh.31 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:13:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8yXub+Meut07EgbLkjjqpxD3kwlu6m9yYaxnhgnEfqU=; b=Crowk5BaLAjnOHyLAafZqnMqJNR/FKEiLqYjG/7Iu97PxMcs5zYxR8MbdDKZxY3/TN QBVBuEsnNH0kGrw/HwfgK04Yk/c+iqTlkClMYa/hJsO5LNd23Nm7v67tq1bAZY2XtSi8 FdeH8zfX+hlQBOp/jDsNBEyeFr3jS+I1bEuAI= Received: by 10.143.62.18 with SMTP id p18mr1198138wfk.244.1309475581560; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:13:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.50] (adsl-70-133-70-225.dsl.scrm01.sbcglobal.net [70.133.70.225]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z7sm1692925pbk.51.2011.06.30.16.12.58 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:13:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4E0D02DA.5030601@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:12:26 -0700 From: Dzonatas Sol User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20110505 Icedove/3.0.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: xml2rfc@ietf.org References: <92B731F2-D166-46FF-A04F-E656CE70796F@amsl.com> <4E0892CE.2020908@gmx.de> <4E097B31.4030602@gmx.de> <4E0CF485.1050206@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <4E0CF485.1050206@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] rsync issue - Re: missing ref files X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 23:13:04 -0000 On 06/30/2011 03:11 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2011-06-30 21:04, Tony Li wrote: >> >> On Jun 30, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Nico Williams wrote: >> >>> Yes please, let's be serious. Specifically, let's not be luddites or, >>> more precisely, let the luddites among us do as they wish, but don't >>> force the rest of us to live what would now be an ascetic lifestyle to >>> us. >> >> >> There's an old saying that all problems in computer science can be >> solved with another level of indirection. Is there some way that we >> could apply that here? >> ... > > Except the one of having too many indirections. > _______________________________________________ > xml2rfc mailing list > xml2rfc@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc > What is expected with ? An indirection in viral comments readability? "Ghost in the wires", misdirection. -- --- http://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol --- Web Development, Software Engineering Ag-Biotech, Virtual Reality, Consultant