From nobody Fri Aug 14 14:42:13 2020 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 5DD323A0B57 for ; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 14:42:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HCtZLLP8yeNX for ; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 14:42:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp125.iad3a.emailsrvr.com (smtp125.iad3a.emailsrvr.com [173.203.187.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89EF53A0B56 for ; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 14:42:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Auth-ID: fluffy@iii.ca Received: by smtp16.relay.iad3a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: fluffy-AT-iii.ca) with ESMTPSA id 0AB8F5B75; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 17:42:08 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B3C43E79-45D4-4279-A295-8F9AAE551C49" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.15\)) From: Cullen Jennings In-Reply-To: <748F0BE8-5DDA-4CC1-9306-0C67F906C955@tzi.org> Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 15:42:07 -0600 Cc: Paul Kyzivat , XML2RFC Interest Group , RFC Interest Message-Id: References: <748F0BE8-5DDA-4CC1-9306-0C67F906C955@tzi.org> To: Carsten Bormann X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.15) X-Classification-ID: d67055be-bb59-4624-8501-264b0a2d5385-1-1 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] [rfc-i] use of sourcecode type X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 21:42:12 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_B3C43E79-45D4-4279-A295-8F9AAE551C49 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Related to this, the RFC says "The RFC Series Editor will maintain a = complete list of the preferred values on the RFC Editor web site =E2=80=9C Does that list exist somewhere, I=E2=80=99m not finding it ? > On Jul 21, 2020, at 9:10 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote: >=20 > A similar problem is giving examples that are intentionally bad in = order to demonstrate a kind of error. >=20 > I typically tag them with a type that is derived from the one I would = give for real code, e.g., =E2=80=9CCDDLx=E2=80=9D for a bad CDDL = example. I think it would be good to agree on some way to indicate = this. >=20 > A related problem is that often several code blocks combine to one = valid instance of CDDL, for example see Figure 1, 2, 3 in RFC 8428. = There is no way to say that Figure 1 and 2 combine into a valid = instance, and so do Figure 1 and 3, but not any other combination. >=20 > And, by the way, those type tags are conventionally lower-cased, but = this is not made very explicit; you have to infer that from the list in = Section 2.48.4 of RFC 7991 or the RFC editor=E2=80=99s updated copy of = that list: >=20 > https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/sourcecode-types.txt >=20 > (Ha, this doesn=E2=80=99t even have =E2=80=9Ccddl=E2=80=9D in it; = I=E2=80=99m not sure how this is updated and whether there shouldn=E2=80=99= t really be an IANA registry for these.) >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 >=20 >> On 2020-07-21, at 16:36, Paul Kyzivat wrote: >>=20 >> I have a question about specification of type in sourcecode elements: >>=20 >> In RFC4566bis there are many examples that have fragments of SDP. But = they aren't compliant to SDP syntax, since it requires that many things = be present - that are intentionally omitted from these examples. >>=20 >> Is it valid to tag these with type=3D"SDP"? >>=20 >> (In sip we had a similar problem. There is a mime-type message/sip, = but we sometimes also return fragments of sip in error messages. We = ended up defining a separate message/sipfrag mime-type for this.) >>=20 >> Thanks, >> Paul >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> xml2rfc mailing list >> xml2rfc@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc >=20 > _______________________________________________ > rfc-interest mailing list > rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org > https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --Apple-Mail=_B3C43E79-45D4-4279-A295-8F9AAE551C49 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8

Related to this, the RFC says "The = RFC Series Editor will maintain a complete list of the = preferred
   values on the =
RFC Editor web site
=E2=80=9C

Does that list exist = somewhere, I=E2=80=99m not finding it ?



On Jul = 21, 2020, at 9:10 AM, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:

A = similar problem is giving examples that are intentionally bad in order = to demonstrate a kind of error.

I typically = tag them with a type that is derived from the one I would give for real = code, e.g., =E2=80=9CCDDLx=E2=80=9D for a bad CDDL example.  I = think it would be good to agree on some way to indicate this.

A related problem is that often several code = blocks combine to one valid instance of CDDL, for example see Figure 1, = 2, 3 in RFC 8428.  There is no way to say that Figure 1 and 2 = combine into a valid instance, and so do Figure 1 and 3, but not any = other combination.

And, by the way, those = type tags are conventionally lower-cased, but this is not made very = explicit; you have to infer that from the list in Section 2.48.4 of RFC = 7991 or the RFC editor=E2=80=99s updated copy of that list:

https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/sourcecode-types.txt
(Ha, this doesn=E2=80=99t even have = =E2=80=9Ccddl=E2=80=9D in it; I=E2=80=99m not sure how this is updated = and whether there shouldn=E2=80=99t really be an IANA registry for = these.)

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten


On 2020-07-21, at 16:36, Paul Kyzivat = <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

I have = a question about specification of type in sourcecode elements:

In RFC4566bis there are many examples that = have fragments of SDP. But they aren't compliant to SDP syntax, since it = requires that many things be present - that are intentionally omitted = from these examples.

Is it valid to tag = these with type=3D"SDP"?

(In sip we had a = similar problem. There is a mime-type message/sip, but we sometimes also = return fragments of sip in error messages. We ended up defining a = separate message/sipfrag mime-type for this.)

= Thanks,
Paul

_______________________________________________
xml2rfc mailing list
xml2rfc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc

_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

= --Apple-Mail=_B3C43E79-45D4-4279-A295-8F9AAE551C49-- From nobody Fri Aug 14 14:48:48 2020 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 9F03C3A0B60 for ; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 14:48:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ywo8kvFw49GS for ; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 14:48:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp106.iad3b.emailsrvr.com (smtp106.iad3b.emailsrvr.com [146.20.161.106]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1D753A0B5E for ; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 14:48:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Auth-ID: fluffy@iii.ca Received: by smtp6.relay.iad3b.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: fluffy-AT-iii.ca) with ESMTPSA id A3EA9201FE; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 17:48:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Cullen Jennings Message-Id: <3EC1101F-397C-4A64-AEDA-02BB809043D9@iii.ca> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_E5A3BB3D-9276-4E12-BE02-B9275C437DA9" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.15\)) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 15:48:42 -0600 In-Reply-To: To: XML2RFC Interest Group , RFC Interest References: <748F0BE8-5DDA-4CC1-9306-0C67F906C955@tzi.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.15) X-Classification-ID: 5db7d30b-9b65-4709-8529-b0554f0f09fe-1-1 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] [rfc-i] use of sourcecode type X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 21:48:47 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_E5A3BB3D-9276-4E12-BE02-B9275C437DA9 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Never-mind - I found=20 https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/sourcecode-types.txt = Not really sure how I supposed to find that. Could we rev the RFC to = have the required information? > On Aug 14, 2020, at 3:42 PM, Cullen Jennings wrote: >=20 >=20 > Related to this, the RFC says "The RFC Series Editor will maintain a = complete list of the preferred > values on the RFC Editor web site > =E2=80=9C >=20 > Does that list exist somewhere, I=E2=80=99m not finding it ? >=20 >=20 >=20 >> On Jul 21, 2020, at 9:10 AM, Carsten Bormann > wrote: >>=20 >> A similar problem is giving examples that are intentionally bad in = order to demonstrate a kind of error. >>=20 >> I typically tag them with a type that is derived from the one I would = give for real code, e.g., =E2=80=9CCDDLx=E2=80=9D for a bad CDDL = example. I think it would be good to agree on some way to indicate = this. >>=20 >> A related problem is that often several code blocks combine to one = valid instance of CDDL, for example see Figure 1, 2, 3 in RFC 8428. = There is no way to say that Figure 1 and 2 combine into a valid = instance, and so do Figure 1 and 3, but not any other combination. >>=20 >> And, by the way, those type tags are conventionally lower-cased, but = this is not made very explicit; you have to infer that from the list in = Section 2.48.4 of RFC 7991 or the RFC editor=E2=80=99s updated copy of = that list: >>=20 >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/sourcecode-types.txt = >>=20 >> (Ha, this doesn=E2=80=99t even have =E2=80=9Ccddl=E2=80=9D in it; = I=E2=80=99m not sure how this is updated and whether there shouldn=E2=80=99= t really be an IANA registry for these.) >>=20 >> Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >>=20 >>=20 >>> On 2020-07-21, at 16:36, Paul Kyzivat wrote: >>>=20 >>> I have a question about specification of type in sourcecode = elements: >>>=20 >>> In RFC4566bis there are many examples that have fragments of SDP. = But they aren't compliant to SDP syntax, since it requires that many = things be present - that are intentionally omitted from these examples. >>>=20 >>> Is it valid to tag these with type=3D"SDP"? >>>=20 >>> (In sip we had a similar problem. There is a mime-type message/sip, = but we sometimes also return fragments of sip in error messages. We = ended up defining a separate message/sipfrag mime-type for this.) >>>=20 >>> Thanks, >>> Paul >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> xml2rfc mailing list >>> xml2rfc@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> rfc-interest mailing list >> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest = --Apple-Mail=_E5A3BB3D-9276-4E12-BE02-B9275C437DA9 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8

Never-mind - I found 

https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/sourcecode-types.txt

Not really sure = how I supposed to find that. Could we rev the RFC to have the required = information?


On = Aug 14, 2020, at 3:42 PM, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> = wrote:


Related to this, the RFC says "The = RFC Series Editor will maintain a complete list of the = preferred
   values on the RFC Editor web site
=E2=80=9C

Does that list = exist somewhere, I=E2=80=99m not finding it ?



On Jul 21, 2020, at 9:10 AM, = Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:

A = similar problem is giving examples that are intentionally bad in order = to demonstrate a kind of error.

I typically = tag them with a type that is derived from the one I would give for real = code, e.g., =E2=80=9CCDDLx=E2=80=9D for a bad CDDL example.  I = think it would be good to agree on some way to indicate this.

A related problem is that often several code = blocks combine to one valid instance of CDDL, for example see Figure 1, = 2, 3 in RFC 8428.  There is no way to say that Figure 1 and 2 = combine into a valid instance, and so do Figure 1 and 3, but not any = other combination.

And, by the way, those = type tags are conventionally lower-cased, but this is not made very = explicit; you have to infer that from the list in Section 2.48.4 of RFC = 7991 or the RFC editor=E2=80=99s updated copy of that list:

https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/sourcecode-types.txt
(Ha, this doesn=E2=80=99t even have = =E2=80=9Ccddl=E2=80=9D in it; I=E2=80=99m not sure how this is updated = and whether there shouldn=E2=80=99t really be an IANA registry for = these.)

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten


On 2020-07-21, at 16:36, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

I have a question about specification of type in sourcecode = elements:

In RFC4566bis there are many = examples that have fragments of SDP. But they aren't compliant to SDP = syntax, since it requires that many things be present - that are = intentionally omitted from these examples.

Is= it valid to tag these with type=3D"SDP"?

(In= sip we had a similar problem. There is a mime-type message/sip, but we = sometimes also return fragments of sip in error messages. We ended up = defining a separate message/sipfrag mime-type for this.)
= Thanks,
Paul

_______________________________________________
xml2rfc mailing list
xml2rfc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc

_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

= --Apple-Mail=_E5A3BB3D-9276-4E12-BE02-B9275C437DA9-- From nobody Mon Aug 17 03:18:12 2020 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 016993A1484 for ; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 03:18:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.848 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.848 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.949, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ci0Jq4SMP26z for ; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 03:18:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (zinfandel.tools.ietf.org [64.170.98.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F7453A0A24 for ; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 03:18:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from h-202-242.a357.priv.bahnhof.se ([158.174.202.242]:63768 helo=tannat.localdomain) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1k7cDO-0004ZS-He; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 03:18:08 -0700 To: Cullen Jennings , XML2RFC Interest Group , RFC Interest References: <748F0BE8-5DDA-4CC1-9306-0C67F906C955@tzi.org> <3EC1101F-397C-4A64-AEDA-02BB809043D9@iii.ca> From: Henrik Levkowetz Message-ID: Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 12:17:59 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3EC1101F-397C-4A64-AEDA-02BB809043D9@iii.ca> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="E0luxlUaWwwQ5HGHuHJK0hM2cMmKiTjIA" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 158.174.202.242 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org, xml2rfc@ietf.org, fluffy@iii.ca X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org) X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] [rfc-i] use of sourcecode type X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 10:18:11 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --E0luxlUaWwwQ5HGHuHJK0hM2cMmKiTjIA Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="nkEPOq1FcRwIVWcSWnSoEmBTVMCgLE77w"; protected-headers="v1" From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Cullen Jennings , XML2RFC Interest Group , RFC Interest Message-ID: Subject: Re: [rfc-i] [xml2rfc] use of sourcecode type References: <748F0BE8-5DDA-4CC1-9306-0C67F906C955@tzi.org> <3EC1101F-397C-4A64-AEDA-02BB809043D9@iii.ca> In-Reply-To: <3EC1101F-397C-4A64-AEDA-02BB809043D9@iii.ca> --nkEPOq1FcRwIVWcSWnSoEmBTVMCgLE77w Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Cullen, On 2020-08-14 23:48, Cullen Jennings wrote: >=20 > Never-mind - I found=20 >=20 > https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/sourcecode-types.txt > >=20 > Not really sure how I supposed to find that. Could we rev the RFC to > have the required information? FWIW, xml2rfc's built-in information, available through '$ xml2rfc --man'= in the latest release and going forward, and online at=20 https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/xml2rfc-doc.html=20 points at this URL for values for the "type" attribute. Henrik =20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >> On Aug 14, 2020, at 3:42 PM, Cullen Jennings wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >> Related to this, the RFC says "The RFC Series Editor will maintain a c= omplete list of the preferred >> values on the RFC Editor web site >> =E2=80=9C >>=20 >> Does that list exist somewhere, I=E2=80=99m not finding it ? >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>> On Jul 21, 2020, at 9:10 AM, Carsten Bormann > wrote: >>>=20 >>> A similar problem is giving examples that are intentionally bad in or= der to demonstrate a kind of error. >>>=20 >>> I typically tag them with a type that is derived from the one I would= give for real code, e.g., =E2=80=9CCDDLx=E2=80=9D for a bad CDDL example= =2E I think it would be good to agree on some way to indicate this. >>>=20 >>> A related problem is that often several code blocks combine to one va= lid instance of CDDL, for example see Figure 1, 2, 3 in RFC 8428. There = is no way to say that Figure 1 and 2 combine into a valid instance, and s= o do Figure 1 and 3, but not any other combination. >>>=20 >>> And, by the way, those type tags are conventionally lower-cased, but = this is not made very explicit; you have to infer that from the list in S= ection 2.48.4 of RFC 7991 or the RFC editor=E2=80=99s updated copy of tha= t list: >>>=20 >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/sourcecode-types.txt >>>=20 >>> (Ha, this doesn=E2=80=99t even have =E2=80=9Ccddl=E2=80=9D in it; I=E2= =80=99m not sure how this is updated and whether there shouldn=E2=80=99t = really be an IANA registry for these.) >>>=20 >>> Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> On 2020-07-21, at 16:36, Paul Kyzivat wrote:= >>>>=20 >>>> I have a question about specification of type in sourcecode elements= : >>>>=20 >>>> In RFC4566bis there are many examples that have fragments of SDP. Bu= t they aren't compliant to SDP syntax, since it requires that many things= be present - that are intentionally omitted from these examples. >>>>=20 >>>> Is it valid to tag these with type=3D"SDP"? >>>>=20 >>>> (In sip we had a similar problem. There is a mime-type message/sip, = but we sometimes also return fragments of sip in error messages. We ended= up defining a separate message/sipfrag mime-type for this.) >>>>=20 >>>> Thanks, >>>> Paul >>>>=20 >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> xml2rfc mailing list >>>> xml2rfc@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> rfc-interest mailing list >>> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > rfc-interest mailing list > rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org > https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest >=20 --nkEPOq1FcRwIVWcSWnSoEmBTVMCgLE77w-- --E0luxlUaWwwQ5HGHuHJK0hM2cMmKiTjIA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEifjc5+rnL1MJBcZSTptXS4+7FxoFAl86WVcACgkQTptXS4+7 FxpaWxAAhOcUhAWUA0/KGjrzQav4TdBZGr90S3dhWtgb+AHb+P39DOznmuhncfWV HoDs6mjRnW/hKU+TNgfX44/D2wG1SR+xhVCRkvdnlEJtjbE9Z4QdiO3m1JIQA14b BUQYZNeUBBRs5L13Iq0JlXTbqxDS6KNF3p9ikJDvGFDauw56g1TNLUs1PuQLL+KL Bfvqz+YbhF/Gr32qvWhu+ycKC3vCqRZbvcJFKy3DqHP5LknjW78iUTz7XP0BDA5g 86z+XK9HV3VqdZxrebm6WDySm9kpsErHMVQH4yPTSuEE5s6qbz/PYl6l7ePLVEjS nuNSvCOme4pKLlxK4w+WPWPuPMJ7jZYRFT+v0sphkZCbyx0VGozV/jsrQCFjX+a0 mblxIoHw3ci98pErd+X/A4yNnYd5yX9qhQp24ww32ouHZHpGrmlsEoOVQUjpVpQF hWxLVwugugsUGNMovplqRX6VDFZWEjlvwVw06b2IX3ArkbSauefTsu1u+fMGmOxj epm2EExfMgEAsWDPbedkM5FEWdLIMJFVTw3RhXPldvYHAGBqJ8CMorZO9Zp/EH58 12Wa3m3VeLjl8OM8t6wNQjs/xieMlO2K3kDPQnA2Krhm6MJowz7MOtp7Wu8RBtzG mdHC3pinhXBHDyiGUtBTRExBEA1l67/Nqkjcp7JuoH1sfpdefuU= =KM6N -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --E0luxlUaWwwQ5HGHuHJK0hM2cMmKiTjIA-- From nobody Thu Aug 20 13:15:39 2020 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 DCAD23A13EE for ; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 13:15:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8-usWHj_nh9l for ; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 13:15:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spark.crystalorb.net (spark.crystalorb.net [IPv6:2607:fca8:1530::c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1CDE3A13ED for ; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 13:15:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.15.169] ([IPv6:2601:184:407f:80ce:5056:c3d2:2add:ec1b]) (authenticated bits=0) by spark.crystalorb.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4+deb7u1) with ESMTP id 07KKFXTq010093 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 13:15:35 -0700 From: "David R. Oran" To: "XML2RFC Interest Group" Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 16:15:28 -0400 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5707) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed; markup=markdown Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: [xml2rfc] Very low priority annoyance with weasyprint X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 20:15:38 -0000 When I generate pdf output, my weasyprint installation gives a soft error of: oran@ORAN-M-51B7 draft-oran-icnrg-qosarch % xml2rfc --pdf draft-oran-icnrg-qosarch-05.xml ERROR:weasyprint:Failed to load stylesheet at https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Noto+Sans : URLError: ERROR:weasyprint:Failed to load stylesheet at https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Noto+Serif : URLError: ERROR:weasyprint:Failed to load stylesheet at https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Roboto+Mono : URLError: This doesn’t affect the output (at least I don’t think so) but I’d appreciate a clue bat for how to eliminate these errors. Thanks! DaveO From nobody Thu Aug 20 20:16:52 2020 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 1E4CD3A17E5 for ; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 20:16:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=wxa1BBWi; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=WJr/HqWw Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SM0euA5BdEfN for ; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 20:16:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 044083A1074 for ; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 20:16:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 34022 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2020 03:16:46 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=84e3.5f3f3c9e.k2008; bh=jJEk+dc2NBwfB0ES4QbQxA/WI3MiTpbLpBQMIMGIfr4=; b=wxa1BBWivy4KFeWe9fPMFaKcLdezC3Y/29AKe1OC358AZwFY/yrEDT38reFQLb7K/3e8Q8+NbfUR0qQjtWY1tPOJNLAGEHIDp5c2pZZqq4luK0P9i125fB5ik6AR9M1cLS2L/XvArxBFhNiqufHikqm2FVFNf9WooBcSvG1ZRFofGubOEaZLb2RywCcC16V/bdEQDshrLwcAuFzKoz9odLqyeMsw7tDg9CjbpXGvc2iXwh08Pr9P+bWT5M2C4KW7hovwAlhmvCyq2McL7sK34+tPB5Nb2jw2fleaqMluAkNgolrgfjXxuiSqZtQwHr24O7puQQh3ZRI1UcxleXnPLQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=84e3.5f3f3c9e.k2008; bh=jJEk+dc2NBwfB0ES4QbQxA/WI3MiTpbLpBQMIMGIfr4=; b=WJr/HqWwH7NAg4fBMKKmIrKneMUW+Cwyw+GgUdt0rPflsKKvZGtcXwOw9dP9tkGSzm73PpH6l0AXVw3Nv4H/uA8izIONgV//4s52t/vMFz5L53LRpfQu9d4UqQxLo6aWlkC6Vbjj8MLuAMGe18otTJUqzvKFUUdbSCQijCaEri9lCVVJ/KVUnFGzGifWhQPDLZk6wnnQFwZ/4Hc/9Ds3jmMvm86xCHCntIE+nv4D7RqCPI2axZ4OcCuVxQeyKJ8m2CCtVmSE1HkI8apCQ0/ICno49WjLoqQ71ZQ3F2cf/w3MizXhEBvz+/AZ29noe1dPyTSmoRdt2lnzwsYEsEdufw== Received: from ary.local ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 21 Aug 2020 03:16:46 -0000 Received: by ary.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 8DC911EFDC3F; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 23:16:45 -0400 (EDT) Date: 20 Aug 2020 23:16:45 -0400 Message-Id: <20200821031645.8DC911EFDC3F@ary.local> From: "John Levine" To: xml2rfc@ietf.org In-Reply-To: Organization: Taughannock Networks X-Headerized: yes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Very low priority annoyance with weasyprint X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 03:16:50 -0000 Try this $ pip3 install certifi That's an up to date certificate bundle that should make it happier. In article you write: >When I generate pdf output, my weasyprint installation gives a soft >error of: > >oran@ORAN-M-51B7 draft-oran-icnrg-qosarch % xml2rfc --pdf >draft-oran-icnrg-qosarch-05.xml >ERROR:weasyprint:Failed to load stylesheet at >https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Noto+Sans : URLError: error [SSL: CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED] certificate verify failed: unable >to get local issuer certificate (_ssl.c:1108)> >ERROR:weasyprint:Failed to load stylesheet at >https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Noto+Serif : URLError: error [SSL: CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED] certificate verify failed: unable >to get local issuer certificate (_ssl.c:1108)> >ERROR:weasyprint:Failed to load stylesheet at >https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Roboto+Mono : URLError: error [SSL: CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED] certificate verify failed: unable >to get local issuer certificate (_ssl.c:1108)> > >This doesn’t affect the output (at least I don’t think so) but I’d >appreciate a clue bat for how to eliminate these errors. > >Thanks! > > >DaveO > From nobody Fri Aug 21 06:18:41 2020 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 F17E33A0821 for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 06:18:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Uk4jk_DXEttU for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 06:18:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spark.crystalorb.net (spark.crystalorb.net [IPv6:2607:fca8:1530::c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B168A3A081D for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 06:18:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.15.173] ([IPv6:2601:184:407f:80ce:5056:c3d2:2add:ec1b]) (authenticated bits=0) by spark.crystalorb.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4+deb7u1) with ESMTP id 07LDIX8J008839 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 21 Aug 2020 06:18:35 -0700 From: "David R. Oran" To: "John Levine" Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 09:18:28 -0400 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5707) Message-ID: <0F12D647-17B5-4CE7-9039-72DE62D973D3@orandom.net> In-Reply-To: <20200821031645.8DC911EFDC3F@ary.local> References: <20200821031645.8DC911EFDC3F@ary.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed; markup=markdown Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Very low priority annoyance with weasyprint X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 13:18:39 -0000 On 20 Aug 2020, at 23:16, John Levine wrote: > Try this > $ pip3 install certifi > > That's an up to date certificate bundle that should make it happier. > Thanks for the clue. I already had an installation and did a pip3 install --upgrade certifi which got me to certifi-2020.6.20. Unfortunately, it didn’t help - same error. Interestingly, if I go to those URLs in a browser, I get no complaints. Other ideas? > > In article you > write: >> When I generate pdf output, my weasyprint installation gives a soft >> error of: >> >> oran@ORAN-M-51B7 draft-oran-icnrg-qosarch % xml2rfc --pdf >> draft-oran-icnrg-qosarch-05.xml >> ERROR:weasyprint:Failed to load stylesheet at >> https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Noto+Sans : URLError: >> > error [SSL: CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED] certificate verify failed: >> unable >> to get local issuer certificate (_ssl.c:1108)> >> ERROR:weasyprint:Failed to load stylesheet at >> https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Noto+Serif : URLError: >> > error [SSL: CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED] certificate verify failed: >> unable >> to get local issuer certificate (_ssl.c:1108)> >> ERROR:weasyprint:Failed to load stylesheet at >> https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Roboto+Mono : URLError: >> > error [SSL: CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED] certificate verify failed: >> unable >> to get local issuer certificate (_ssl.c:1108)> >> >> This doesn’t affect the output (at least I don’t think so) but >> I’d >> appreciate a clue bat for how to eliminate these errors. >> >> Thanks! >> >> >> DaveO >> DaveO From nobody Fri Aug 21 09:01:56 2020 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 87DEF3A0B88 for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 09:01:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=jnmYiuRS; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=EcwqsM+X Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H1eaipqV7lBy for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 09:01:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78A773A0B76 for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 09:01:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 28108 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2020 16:01:48 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type; s=6dc8.5f3fefec.k2008; i=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=mI5Yla0eTy0rNJe509o04EJCvbdzxcKFMNFVlcMSWb0=; b=jnmYiuRSM4b+fVlonYgj3RnAwGrfNB6FjexkkgzCBG8i7VbL8vwpGtsdP8nLfyS7hWbfmT+tIZVnLq7EYxEwwsiFTWlkAFpnjJel2CbuARG4X9h0qEG+ciLfEd9fdPCas76cJ27cHVyceFAQjogYHrIt4gHz+9Be3bn4KEffHhB857l+4BQzP4N5slmSQh4nEyEgQUgn5kbJfgBcJAF4bd6pKjdoZOp9E9Xex3e8g+dJuZNmwVZ6VIGrLLVumJSCp0D6UCceGUQPxtm5UfsvD+0pV3SR/Ih/odLW+1BTa1FBrvQLM1JEN5qCOiJ3ivd+80MDSJHCmoGWsng08ULeSw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type; s=6dc8.5f3fefec.k2008; olt=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=mI5Yla0eTy0rNJe509o04EJCvbdzxcKFMNFVlcMSWb0=; b=EcwqsM+X88zpBpIHW8vI4x5dlIxZ6ZHvvy7/znPGdDBexO9rLSBF44kAGJ5p6p/G8q8CF57wRW2JHFoLuSkR/3pm49brZb/eHpKMHA4eZrLPBBsckrrG+MiJufOOTPZuImAJG78QrBogRKXxhLTgV6SerLtzOBu6+t6OvF0MfA5FOYJVXGLGP/6g3idyISyKrjghVxdYVDJgptB82bJIiaLagm5uS3Jhc4oOk5KBFp6Eg0hmpZg3UG7j8bONZqKrXctcqKjxqR4Gt2EydF2efpm7eW6Cp4JTGUSW81n+ajBPyHUf4QlP48FO0LmJki+lfOY3QD+yVxiKJPqreSCNig== Received: from IPv6:2600:380:28a1:9ce6:3d9f:71f8:5be:1fe9 ([IPv6:2600:380:28a1:9ce6:3d9f:71f8:5be:1fe9]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA AES-128-GCM AEAD, johnl@iecc.com) via TCP6; 21 Aug 2020 16:01:47 -0000 Date: 21 Aug 2020 12:01:45 -0400 Message-ID: <20200821120145.28103.qmail@submit.iecc.com> From: "John Levine" To: "David R. Oran" Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org SavedFromEmail: johnl@taugh.com In-Reply-To: <0F12D647-17B5-4CE7-9039-72DE62D973D3@orandom.net> Importance: normal MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--_com.samsung.android.email_1913080669710280" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Very low priority annoyance with weasyprint X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 16:01:54 -0000 ----_com.samsung.android.email_1913080669710280 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 CkhhcmQgdG8gc2F5LiBPbiBteSBNYWMgYW5kIEZyZWVCU0QgYW5kIEhlbnJpaydzIGxpbnV4IGl0 IGlzIG9rLCBzbyB3aGF0J3MgZGlmZmVyZW50IG9uIHlvdXIgc2V0dXA/wqBBdXRvY29ycmVjdGx5 LEpvaG4KLS0tLS0tLS0gT3JpZ2luYWwgbWVzc2FnZSAtLS0tLS0tLUZyb206ICJEYXZpZCBSLiBP cmFuIiA8ZGF2ZW9yYW5Ab3JhbmRvbS5uZXQ+IERhdGU6IDgvMjEvMjAgIDA5OjI4ICAoR01ULTA1 OjAwKSBUbzogSm9obiBMZXZpbmUgPGpvaG5sQHRhdWdoLmNvbT4gQ2M6IHhtbDJyZmNAaWV0Zi5v cmcgU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFt4bWwycmZjXSBWZXJ5IGxvdyBwcmlvcml0eSBhbm5veWFuY2Ugd2l0 aCB3ZWFzeXByaW50IE9uIDIwIEF1ZyAyMDIwLCBhdCAyMzoxNiwgSm9obiBMZXZpbmUgd3JvdGU6 PiBUcnkgdGhpcz4gJCBwaXAzIGluc3RhbGwgY2VydGlmaT4+IFRoYXQncyBhbiB1cCB0byBkYXRl IGNlcnRpZmljYXRlIGJ1bmRsZSB0aGF0IHNob3VsZCBtYWtlIGl0IGhhcHBpZXIuPlRoYW5rcyBm b3IgdGhlIGNsdWUuSSBhbHJlYWR5IGhhZCBhbiBpbnN0YWxsYXRpb24gYW5kIGRpZCBhIHBpcDMg aW5zdGFsbCAtLXVwZ3JhZGUgY2VydGlmaSB3aGljaCBnb3QgbWUgdG8gY2VydGlmaS0yMDIwLjYu MjAuVW5mb3J0dW5hdGVseSwgaXQgZGlkbuKAmXQgaGVscCAtIHNhbWUgZXJyb3IuSW50ZXJlc3Rp bmdseSwgaWYgSSBnbyB0byB0aG9zZSBVUkxzIGluIGEgYnJvd3NlciwgSSBnZXQgbm8gY29tcGxh aW50cy5PdGhlciBpZGVhcz8+PiBJbiBhcnRpY2xlIDxGQUVFNTA5Ny03MEY5LTRGNDEtQUUwMC0x ODA0QUMwRjMyMkRAb3JhbmRvbS5uZXQ+IHlvdSA+IHdyaXRlOj4+IFdoZW4gSSBnZW5lcmF0ZSBw ZGYgb3V0cHV0LCBteSB3ZWFzeXByaW50IGluc3RhbGxhdGlvbiBnaXZlcyBhIHNvZnQ+PiBlcnJv ciBvZjo+Pj4+IG9yYW5AT1JBTi1NLTUxQjcgZHJhZnQtb3Jhbi1pY25yZy1xb3NhcmNoICUgeG1s MnJmYyAtLXBkZj4+IGRyYWZ0LW9yYW4taWNucmctcW9zYXJjaC0wNS54bWw+PiBFUlJPUjp3ZWFz eXByaW50OkZhaWxlZCB0byBsb2FkIHN0eWxlc2hlZXQgYXQ+PiBodHRwczovL2ZvbnRzLmdvb2ds ZWFwaXMuY29tL2Nzcz9mYW1pbHk9Tm90bytTYW5zIDogVVJMRXJyb3I6ID4+IDx1cmxvcGVuPj4g ZXJyb3IgW1NTTDogQ0VSVElGSUNBVEVfVkVSSUZZX0ZBSUxFRF0gY2VydGlmaWNhdGUgdmVyaWZ5 IGZhaWxlZDogPj4gdW5hYmxlPj4gdG8gZ2V0IGxvY2FsIGlzc3VlciBjZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSAoX3Nz bC5jOjExMDgpPj4+IEVSUk9SOndlYXN5cHJpbnQ6RmFpbGVkIHRvIGxvYWQgc3R5bGVzaGVldCBh dD4+IGh0dHBzOi8vZm9udHMuZ29vZ2xlYXBpcy5jb20vY3NzP2ZhbWlseT1Ob3RvK1NlcmlmIDog VVJMRXJyb3I6ID4+IDx1cmxvcGVuPj4gZXJyb3IgW1NTTDogQ0VSVElGSUNBVEVfVkVSSUZZX0ZB SUxFRF0gY2VydGlmaWNhdGUgdmVyaWZ5IGZhaWxlZDogPj4gdW5hYmxlPj4gdG8gZ2V0IGxvY2Fs IGlzc3VlciBjZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSAoX3NzbC5jOjExMDgpPj4+IEVSUk9SOndlYXN5cHJpbnQ6RmFp bGVkIHRvIGxvYWQgc3R5bGVzaGVldCBhdD4+IGh0dHBzOi8vZm9udHMuZ29vZ2xlYXBpcy5jb20v Y3NzP2ZhbWlseT1Sb2JvdG8rTW9ubyA6IFVSTEVycm9yOiA+PiA8dXJsb3Blbj4+IGVycm9yIFtT U0w6IENFUlRJRklDQVRFX1ZFUklGWV9GQUlMRURdIGNlcnRpZmljYXRlIHZlcmlmeSBmYWlsZWQ6 ID4+IHVuYWJsZT4+IHRvIGdldCBsb2NhbCBpc3N1ZXIgY2VydGlmaWNhdGUgKF9zc2wuYzoxMTA4 KT4+Pj4+IFRoaXMgZG9lc27igJl0IGFmZmVjdCB0aGUgb3V0cHV0IChhdCBsZWFzdCBJIGRvbuKA mXQgdGhpbmsgc28pIGJ1dCA+PiBJ4oCZZD4+IGFwcHJlY2lhdGUgYSBjbHVlIGJhdCBmb3IgaG93 IHRvIGVsaW1pbmF0ZSB0aGVzZSBlcnJvcnMuPj4+PiBUaGFua3MhPj4+Pj4+IERhdmVPPj5EYXZl Tw== ----_com.samsung.android.email_1913080669710280 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+PGhlYWQ+PG1ldGEgaHR0cC1lcXVpdj0iQ29udGVudC1UeXBlIiBjb250ZW50PSJ0ZXh0 L2h0bWw7IGNoYXJzZXQ9VVRGLTgiPjwvaGVhZD48Ym9keSBkaXI9ImF1dG8iPgo8ZGl2IGRpcj0i YXV0byI+SGFyZCB0byBzYXkuIE9uIG15IE1hYyBhbmQgRnJlZUJTRCBhbmQgSGVucmlrJ3MgbGlu dXggaXQgaXMgb2ssIHNvIHdoYXQncyBkaWZmZXJlbnQgb24geW91ciBzZXR1cD8mbmJzcDs8L2Rp dj48ZGl2IGRpcj0iYXV0byI+PGJyPjwvZGl2PjxkaXYgZGlyPSJhdXRvIj48YnI+PC9kaXY+PGRp diBkaXI9ImF1dG8iPjxicj48L2Rpdj48ZGl2IGlkPSJjb21wb3Nlcl9zaWduYXR1cmUiIGRpcj0i YXV0byI+PG1ldGEgaHR0cC1lcXVpdj0iQ29udGVudC1UeXBlIiBjb250ZW50PSJ0ZXh0L2h0bWw7 IGNoYXJzZXQ9VVRGLTgiPjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo4NSU7Y29sb3I6IzU3NTc1NyIg ZGlyPSJhdXRvIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiA4NSU7Ij5BdXRvY29ycmVjdGx5LDwv c3Bhbj48L2Rpdj48ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6ODUlO2NvbG9yOiM1NzU3NTciIGRpcj0i YXV0byI+Sm9objwvZGl2PjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo4NSU7Y29sb3I6IzU3NTc1NyIg ZGlyPSJhdXRvIj48YnI+PC9kaXY+PC9kaXY+PGRpdiBkaXI9ImF1dG8iPjxicj48L2Rpdj48ZGl2 Pjxicj48L2Rpdj48ZGl2IGRpcj0iYXV0byIgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMDAlO2NvbG9yOiMw MDAwMDAiPjxkaXY+LS0tLS0tLS0gT3JpZ2luYWwgbWVzc2FnZSAtLS0tLS0tLTwvZGl2PjxkaXY+ RnJvbTogIkRhdmlkIFIuIE9yYW4iICZsdDtkYXZlb3JhbkBvcmFuZG9tLm5ldCZndDsgPC9kaXY+ PGRpdj5EYXRlOiA4LzIxLzIwICAwOToyOCAgKEdNVC0wNTowMCkgPC9kaXY+PGRpdj5UbzogSm9o biBMZXZpbmUgJmx0O2pvaG5sQHRhdWdoLmNvbSZndDsgPC9kaXY+PGRpdj5DYzogeG1sMnJmY0Bp ZXRmLm9yZyA8L2Rpdj48ZGl2PlN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbeG1sMnJmY10gVmVyeSBsb3cgcHJpb3Jp dHkgYW5ub3lhbmNlIHdpdGggd2Vhc3lwcmludCA8L2Rpdj48ZGl2Pjxicj48L2Rpdj48L2Rpdj5P biAyMCBBdWcgMjAyMCwgYXQgMjM6MTYsIEpvaG4gTGV2aW5lIHdyb3RlOjxicj48YnI+Jmd0OyBU cnkgdGhpczxicj4mZ3Q7ICQgcGlwMyBpbnN0YWxsIGNlcnRpZmk8YnI+Jmd0Ozxicj4mZ3Q7IFRo YXQncyBhbiB1cCB0byBkYXRlIGNlcnRpZmljYXRlIGJ1bmRsZSB0aGF0IHNob3VsZCBtYWtlIGl0 IGhhcHBpZXIuPGJyPiZndDs8YnI+VGhhbmtzIGZvciB0aGUgY2x1ZS48YnI+PGJyPkkgYWxyZWFk eSBoYWQgYW4gaW5zdGFsbGF0aW9uIGFuZCBkaWQgYSBwaXAzIGluc3RhbGwgLS11cGdyYWRlIGNl cnRpZmkgPGJyPndoaWNoIGdvdCBtZSB0byBjZXJ0aWZpLTIwMjAuNi4yMC48YnI+PGJyPlVuZm9y dHVuYXRlbHksIGl0IGRpZG7igJl0IGhlbHAgLSBzYW1lIGVycm9yLjxicj48YnI+SW50ZXJlc3Rp bmdseSwgaWYgSSBnbyB0byB0aG9zZSBVUkxzIGluIGEgYnJvd3NlciwgSSBnZXQgbm8gY29tcGxh aW50cy48YnI+PGJyPk90aGVyIGlkZWFzPzxicj48YnI+Jmd0Ozxicj4mZ3Q7IEluIGFydGljbGUg Jmx0O0ZBRUU1MDk3LTcwRjktNEY0MS1BRTAwLTE4MDRBQzBGMzIyREBvcmFuZG9tLm5ldCZndDsg eW91IDxicj4mZ3Q7IHdyaXRlOjxicj4mZ3Q7Jmd0OyBXaGVuIEkgZ2VuZXJhdGUgcGRmIG91dHB1 dCwgbXkgd2Vhc3lwcmludCBpbnN0YWxsYXRpb24gZ2l2ZXMgYSBzb2Z0PGJyPiZndDsmZ3Q7IGVy cm9yIG9mOjxicj4mZ3Q7Jmd0Ozxicj4mZ3Q7Jmd0OyBvcmFuQE9SQU4tTS01MUI3IGRyYWZ0LW9y YW4taWNucmctcW9zYXJjaCAlIHhtbDJyZmMgLS1wZGY8YnI+Jmd0OyZndDsgZHJhZnQtb3Jhbi1p Y25yZy1xb3NhcmNoLTA1LnhtbDxicj4mZ3Q7Jmd0OyBFUlJPUjp3ZWFzeXByaW50OkZhaWxlZCB0 byBsb2FkIHN0eWxlc2hlZXQgYXQ8YnI+Jmd0OyZndDsgaHR0cHM6Ly9mb250cy5nb29nbGVhcGlz LmNvbS9jc3M/ZmFtaWx5PU5vdG8rU2FucyA6IFVSTEVycm9yOiA8YnI+Jmd0OyZndDsgJmx0O3Vy bG9wZW48YnI+Jmd0OyZndDsgZXJyb3IgW1NTTDogQ0VSVElGSUNBVEVfVkVSSUZZX0ZBSUxFRF0g Y2VydGlmaWNhdGUgdmVyaWZ5IGZhaWxlZDogPGJyPiZndDsmZ3Q7IHVuYWJsZTxicj4mZ3Q7Jmd0 OyB0byBnZXQgbG9jYWwgaXNzdWVyIGNlcnRpZmljYXRlIChfc3NsLmM6MTEwOCkmZ3Q7PGJyPiZn dDsmZ3Q7IEVSUk9SOndlYXN5cHJpbnQ6RmFpbGVkIHRvIGxvYWQgc3R5bGVzaGVldCBhdDxicj4m Z3Q7Jmd0OyBodHRwczovL2ZvbnRzLmdvb2dsZWFwaXMuY29tL2Nzcz9mYW1pbHk9Tm90bytTZXJp ZiA6IFVSTEVycm9yOiA8YnI+Jmd0OyZndDsgJmx0O3VybG9wZW48YnI+Jmd0OyZndDsgZXJyb3Ig W1NTTDogQ0VSVElGSUNBVEVfVkVSSUZZX0ZBSUxFRF0gY2VydGlmaWNhdGUgdmVyaWZ5IGZhaWxl ZDogPGJyPiZndDsmZ3Q7IHVuYWJsZTxicj4mZ3Q7Jmd0OyB0byBnZXQgbG9jYWwgaXNzdWVyIGNl cnRpZmljYXRlIChfc3NsLmM6MTEwOCkmZ3Q7PGJyPiZndDsmZ3Q7IEVSUk9SOndlYXN5cHJpbnQ6 RmFpbGVkIHRvIGxvYWQgc3R5bGVzaGVldCBhdDxicj4mZ3Q7Jmd0OyBodHRwczovL2ZvbnRzLmdv b2dsZWFwaXMuY29tL2Nzcz9mYW1pbHk9Um9ib3RvK01vbm8gOiBVUkxFcnJvcjogPGJyPiZndDsm Z3Q7ICZsdDt1cmxvcGVuPGJyPiZndDsmZ3Q7IGVycm9yIFtTU0w6IENFUlRJRklDQVRFX1ZFUklG WV9GQUlMRURdIGNlcnRpZmljYXRlIHZlcmlmeSBmYWlsZWQ6IDxicj4mZ3Q7Jmd0OyB1bmFibGU8 YnI+Jmd0OyZndDsgdG8gZ2V0IGxvY2FsIGlzc3VlciBjZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSAoX3NzbC5jOjExMDgp Jmd0Ozxicj4mZ3Q7Jmd0Ozxicj4mZ3Q7Jmd0OyBUaGlzIGRvZXNu4oCZdCBhZmZlY3QgdGhlIG91 dHB1dCAoYXQgbGVhc3QgSSBkb27igJl0IHRoaW5rIHNvKSBidXQgPGJyPiZndDsmZ3Q7IEnigJlk PGJyPiZndDsmZ3Q7IGFwcHJlY2lhdGUgYSBjbHVlIGJhdCBmb3IgaG93IHRvIGVsaW1pbmF0ZSB0 aGVzZSBlcnJvcnMuPGJyPiZndDsmZ3Q7PGJyPiZndDsmZ3Q7IFRoYW5rcyE8YnI+Jmd0OyZndDs8 YnI+Jmd0OyZndDs8YnI+Jmd0OyZndDsgRGF2ZU88YnI+Jmd0OyZndDs8YnI+PGJyPkRhdmVPPGJy Pjxicj48L2JvZHk+PC9odG1sPg== ----_com.samsung.android.email_1913080669710280-- From nobody Sun Aug 23 22:09:21 2020 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 E344B3A0A1C for ; Sun, 23 Aug 2020 22:09:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.003 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KFmCQMLNJNYt for ; Sun, 23 Aug 2020 22:09:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13E1D3A0A13 for ; Sun, 23 Aug 2020 22:09:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.217.102] (p5089ae91.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.174.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4BZgCD0BYpzyTd; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 07:09:12 +0200 (CEST) From: Carsten Bormann Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 619938551.6495039-781b2303b22bbb8a0de1708e9aa32ebb Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\)) Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 07:09:11 +0200 Message-Id: To: XML2RFC Interest Group X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1) Archived-At: Subject: [xml2rfc] V3 running headers can thwart rfcdiff X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 05:09:20 -0000 draft-foudil-securitytxt-09.txt (apparently V2): Internet-DraftA File Format to Aid in Security VulnerabilitFebruary 2020 draft-foudil-securitytxt-10.txt (apparently V3): Internet-DrafA File Format to Aid in Security Vulnerability August 2020 Slightly broken rfcdiff output: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-foudil-securitytxt-10 I think I would help if the V3 output could maintain the full = =E2=80=9CInternet-Draft=E2=80=9D like V2 apparently did. (I know that Yakov should set an abbrev in the title, but he didn=E2=80=99= t.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Mon Aug 24 03:32:00 2020 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 6F6263A0C44 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 03:31:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.947 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[NICE_REPLY_A=-0.948, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FmVGVcheGda6 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 03:31:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (zinfandel.tools.ietf.org [64.170.98.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C90C43A0C1F for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 03:31:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from h-202-242.a357.priv.bahnhof.se ([158.174.202.242]:50213 helo=tannat.localdomain) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1kA9lV-0004NI-25; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 03:31:51 -0700 To: Carsten Bormann , XML2RFC Interest Group References: From: Henrik Levkowetz Message-ID: Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:31:32 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="GQUxU6SFXidfNVJ4mnwNIQDO5nKmX08ht" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 158.174.202.242 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: xml2rfc@ietf.org, cabo@tzi.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org) X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] V3 running headers can thwart rfcdiff X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 10:31:59 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --GQUxU6SFXidfNVJ4mnwNIQDO5nKmX08ht Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="wTjvUfFIXkMo9jVkkdBmsRh5oRkicV5P0"; protected-headers="v1" From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Carsten Bormann , XML2RFC Interest Group Message-ID: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] V3 running headers can thwart rfcdiff References: In-Reply-To: --wTjvUfFIXkMo9jVkkdBmsRh5oRkicV5P0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Carsten, On 2020-08-24 07:09, Carsten Bormann wrote: > draft-foudil-securitytxt-09.txt (apparently V2): >=20 > Internet-DraftA File Format to Aid in Security VulnerabilitFebruary 202= 0 >=20 > draft-foudil-securitytxt-10.txt (apparently V3): >=20 > Internet-DrafA File Format to Aid in Security Vulnerability August 202= 0 >=20 > Slightly broken rfcdiff output: >=20 > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-foudil-securitytxt-10 >=20 > I think I would help if the V3 output could maintain the full > =E2=80=9CInternet-Draft=E2=80=9D like V2 apparently did. Agreed. This is a bug. Fixed in my working copy; will be part of the ne= xt release. > (I know that Yakov should set an abbrev in the title, but he > didn=E2=80=99t.) >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 > _______________________________________________ > xml2rfc mailing list > xml2rfc@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc >=20 --wTjvUfFIXkMo9jVkkdBmsRh5oRkicV5P0-- --GQUxU6SFXidfNVJ4mnwNIQDO5nKmX08ht Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEifjc5+rnL1MJBcZSTptXS4+7FxoFAl9Dlw0ACgkQTptXS4+7 FxrrzA//aNMqO3WL1KAYdGYMfluKPwrS61461U0N+qAQ3530yisVoM08xEe3qgKo ZG6YxYvgcS0wsmMnUBm8FfxZSyd0IlvV2W1++K54qCGXZnvKcgGcXku9eb8DPRFx 7wM/+oSGJstV1+cBnWMdIbus/dFGOHk2H3Fwt1D+Y82dw1jHa9nrdYi0D9/iU8YH 5VmPWqRA9qbTFLSdnOsXN6FnmIqxK7VgngrUGuyNaNqq8LqXsVr2CBGgr4I2AAS4 KGNZn6rsksNAZMqiGh7huPiu4mZsppHoRrFTFZF96fddQt5H0MbtaZ+xVYFMGA23 RK21zDJS5FGvoKjY/0XVqrX5Z/aDRTsQKg0kAOoV3zj6l/GVTlUUPPHlt1gK2HU0 +n+OVoAuH3kzslHLbWTpbvYBlOLbT5ZtDn7EfsZu7csDtc8Do02JhTgPm25l3cza fMeUZoL1glSIJHyNnQSYlp3oJop7uQHolO02fSKPv6nZJsUifC/pPgUo2A/ZX7Ro f9F1caoCOG2+1oxKwnBnkCQk4XSMh1/4HevG02Vr2CmO8bupBWvT9ItwVwfy5XC5 cJ29Z3HfEtikDnb/KY0qljewgCZYpcXbcxBdh7JBsaQ6cmdkBb08ePoNskyQ6PDY JIGhRPjimcFP1z8xkFdIjHoZ5dYEH5YK+pjAW/y7YPPrlm/jQhQ= =Jh7x -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --GQUxU6SFXidfNVJ4mnwNIQDO5nKmX08ht-- From nobody Mon Aug 24 04:01:19 2020 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 EE1053A0CB5 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 04:01:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.003 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WwAP7zYJEgff for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 04:01:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E2B93A0CB1 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 04:01:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.217.102] (p5089ae91.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.174.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4BZq1K2gqMz10yR; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:01:09 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:01:08 +0200 Cc: XML2RFC Interest Group X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 619959668.947507-14634e33b373fdb4d1848990cab82213 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: Henrik Levkowetz X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] V3 running headers can thwart rfcdiff X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 11:01:18 -0000 On 2020-08-24, at 12:31, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: >=20 > Agreed. This is a bug. Fixed in my working copy; will be part of the = next > release. Thank you! Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Mon Aug 24 07:36:13 2020 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 C33B33A0E80 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 07:36:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rpFl6S-m0TrN for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 07:36:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spark.crystalorb.net (spark.crystalorb.net [IPv6:2607:fca8:1530::c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7698B3A0E7D for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 07:36:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.15.154] ([IPv6:2601:184:407f:80ce:6d27:c2f7:d645:36c9]) (authenticated bits=0) by spark.crystalorb.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4+deb7u1) with ESMTP id 07OEa7hf029025 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 07:36:09 -0700 From: "David R. Oran" To: "XML2RFC Interest Group" Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 10:36:02 -0400 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5708) Message-ID: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_87A01B76-4136-4243-9E64-E42328F9748C_=" Archived-At: Subject: [xml2rfc] Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:36:12 -0000 --=_MailMate_87A01B76-4136-4243-9E64-E42328F9748C_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed; markup=markdown Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable One of my docs is in IRSG review, and the reviewer objected that the = references to conference papers don=E2=80=99t confirm to the generally = accepted citation format. In particular, conference papers generally = have the paper title in Italics, followed by the Conference name, = followed by the conference date. xml2rfc can=E2=80=99t seem to be cajoled to output this. It rejects an = element inside a title element, so I can=E2=80=99t put the title in itali= cs. = If I try to put the title in quotes (the alternative formulation), I get = doubled double-quotes at the front of the title element. Is there some work-around or do I just tell the reviewer =E2=80=9Csorry, = no = can do=E2=80=9D, complain to the RFCed? Just as an additional aside, it would really be an improvement if the = RFC reference format was enhanced to have some more of the abstract = elements supported by BibTex, especially an element to = separate the paper title from the publishing vehicle. Here=E2=80=99s an example: "RICE: Remote Method Invocation in ICN," in = Proceedings of the 5th ACM Conference on Information-Centric Networking = - ICN '18 = DaveO --=_MailMate_87A01B76-4136-4243-9E64-E42328F9748C_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

One of my docs is in IRSG review, and the reviewer object= ed that the references to conference papers don=E2=80=99t confirm to the = generally accepted citation format. In particular, conference papers gene= rally have the paper title in Italics, followed by the Conference name, f= ollowed by the conference date.

xml2rfc can=E2=80=99t seem to be cajoled to output this. = It rejects an <em> element inside a title element, so I can=E2=80=99= t put the title in italics. If I try to put the title in quotes (the alte= rnative formulation), I get doubled double-quotes at the front of the tit= le element.

Is there some work-around or do I just tell the reviewer = =E2=80=9Csorry, no can do=E2=80=9D, complain to the RFCed?

Just as an additional aside, it would really be an improv= ement if the RFC reference format was enhanced to have some more of the a= bstract elements supported by BibTex, especially an <inProceedings>= element to separate the paper title from the publishing vehicle.

Here=E2=80=99s an example:

    <reference=
 anchor=3D"Krol2018" target=3D"https://conferences.sigcomm.org/acm-icn/20=
18/proceedings/icn18-final9.pdf">
      <front>
        <title>"RICE: Remote Method Invocation in ICN," in Proceedi=
ngs of the 5th ACM Conference on Information-Centric Networking - ICN '18=
</title>
        <seriesInfo name=3D"DOI" value=3D"10.1145/3267955.3267956"/>=
;
        <author surname=3D"Kr=C3=B3l" initials=3D"M." fullname=3D"Mich=
a=C5=82 Kr=C3=B3l" asciiSurname=3D"Krol" asciiFullname=3D"Michal Krol"/&g=
t;
        <author surname=3D"Habak" initials=3D"K." fullname=3D"Karim Ha=
bak"/>
        <author surname=3D"Oran" initials=3D"D." fullname=3D"David Ora=
n"/>
        <author surname=3D"Kutscher" initials=3D"D." fullname=3D"Dirk =
Kutscher"/>
        <author surname=3D"Psaras" initials=3D"I." fullname=3D"Ioannis=
 Psaras"/>
        <date year=3D"2018" month=3D"September"/>
      </front>
    </reference>

DaveO

--=_MailMate_87A01B76-4136-4243-9E64-E42328F9748C_=-- From nobody Mon Aug 24 11:53:58 2020 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 32C0E3A0C6F for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 11:53:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.049 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.049 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=Uh0CJo7C; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=cRYCnfsJ Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oFY8nheSetbP for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 11:53:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4069E3A0C6A for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 11:53:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 26992 invoked from network); 24 Aug 2020 18:53:50 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=695f.5f440cbe.k2008; bh=3E3Oa6F23t6F+AykfH0avOT8U40YaKKlhGQCIpX1/5U=; b=Uh0CJo7CLQhwYCAn+GnvdmHVEAspJDnPzqRVuZi9s2SJMMnqTaJ7cINiMHlfoUlHv6YJZtaXSIpTLxrMPWRJAiKum3iydQE4tlG3G3eKEvLpeZiDlp3MXAMO4Us3BiY1Cb4Q5V1wayL4qe5+h2gSSbtv5eN6ZJHYaGOTC0Ht+5uI5c4CoHocD/N+8z4++xNlKcwfz10xA4AuNPPxlEeKweD15q4THbTXabt5GWWaQhL8j052QK5JOLes/7T8mlVaGa+YrHP3k2n0D/2Dn7iJeg+zuMgG2lrBZsTvCm8F1Qy0OWbjZUmVDnYa8wb8VutzDBtthggJuR2V4Z8c9CZdtw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=695f.5f440cbe.k2008; bh=3E3Oa6F23t6F+AykfH0avOT8U40YaKKlhGQCIpX1/5U=; b=cRYCnfsJap2qGwZ8n8fQD3WSgHl8OF463rvazRKm0+dtzM9nhO1shBcJ5xkoJe+h3p4fzT9amD+REmSTlEWyDT/NWvKfylZe+o2zbUHxsWGdX2IEfp0RjvNT9qEEUa/48p7n/gWKeWwW2DcHhl/NdZeLdunRI0UfpuU8/tDae6DjKoj962DXgVHX5z+1DRIiZTAE+HKOF2D+5idxIPqhCWwkbMSbl+W/7MGRiTvXtvDgH9dQE7O4AX48SzvFy93Jar1ilEx2iCYmmCb6N2tNFRf+j2rLFKbXba3FpIhjzBFcB/p4FPhZ3N8KNS+XjyWa9cLKN4habH6xQ19z6NOvpA== Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 24 Aug 2020 18:53:50 -0000 Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id D4CA41F1529C; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:53:49 -0400 (EDT) Date: 24 Aug 2020 14:53:49 -0400 Message-Id: <20200824185349.D4CA41F1529C@ary.qy> From: "John Levine" To: xml2rfc@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> Organization: Taughannock Networks X-Headerized: yes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 18:53:56 -0000 In article <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> you write: >One of my docs is in IRSG review, and the reviewer objected that the >references to conference papers don’t confirm to the generally >accepted citation format. In particular, conference papers generally >have the paper title in Italics, followed by the Conference name, >followed by the conference date. Every publisher and professional society has its own style guide, which includes the reference formats. Elsevier alone has ten different formats, which they describe here: https://www.elsevier.com/editors-update/story/author-support/reference-formatting If your draft is published as an RFC, the rendered versions will follow the RFC style. On the other hand, if the reviewer can only find italics in the references to complain about, your paper must be in pretty good shape. R's, John -- Regards, John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly From nobody Mon Aug 24 12:04:22 2020 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 2E4063A086B for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:04:20 -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=[SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yvejmlI-qUYP for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:04:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0072B3A0843 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:04:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kAHlR-0002Aq-3r; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 19:04:17 +0000 Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:04:16 -0700 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: "David R. Oran" Cc: "XML2RFC Interest Group" In-Reply-To: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> References: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/26.3 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 19:04:20 -0000 > Just as an additional aside, it would really be an improvement if the > RFC reference format was enhanced to have some more of the abstract > elements supported by BibTex, especially an element to > separate the paper title from the publishing vehicle. i am lazy. please either accept bibtex or can someone hack a converter from bibtex to xml2rfc? while you are at it, the inverse would be nice, as i have to cite rfcs in papers. randy From nobody Mon Aug 24 12:06:01 2020 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 0C1183A098E for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:06:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.003 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0tiCtkbxIqe9 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:05:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B7CE3A098A for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:05:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.217.102] (p5089ae91.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.174.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Bb1md0snKzyS3; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:05:53 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:05:52 +0200 Cc: XML2RFC Interest Group X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 619988752.633329-84cae8f7e8ce364c15f5a9f4f9147160 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> To: "David R. Oran" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 19:06:01 -0000 FYI, this is what doilit (part of kramdown-rfc) generates: $ doilit -x=3DKrol2018 10.1145/3267955.3267956 RICE I know the series info workaround is an ugly hack, but it works for me. (The fact that doilit doesn=E2=80=99t make use of the subtitle = information probably should be counted as a bug.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten > On 2020-08-24, at 16:36, David R. Oran wrote: >=20 > One of my docs is in IRSG review, and the reviewer objected that the = references to conference papers don=E2=80=99t confirm to the generally = accepted citation format. In particular, conference papers generally = have the paper title in Italics, followed by the Conference name, = followed by the conference date. >=20 > xml2rfc can=E2=80=99t seem to be cajoled to output this. It rejects an = element inside a title element, so I can=E2=80=99t put the title in = italics. If I try to put the title in quotes (the alternative = formulation), I get doubled double-quotes at the front of the title = element. >=20 > Is there some work-around or do I just tell the reviewer =E2=80=9Csorry,= no can do=E2=80=9D, complain to the RFCed? >=20 > Just as an additional aside, it would really be an improvement if the = RFC reference format was enhanced to have some more of the abstract = elements supported by BibTex, especially an element to = separate the paper title from the publishing vehicle. >=20 > Here=E2=80=99s an example: >=20 > > > "RICE: Remote Method Invocation in ICN," in Proceedings = of the 5th ACM Conference on Information-Centric Networking - ICN = '18 > > > > > > > > > >=20 > DaveO >=20 > _______________________________________________ > xml2rfc mailing list > xml2rfc@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc From nobody Mon Aug 24 12:20:39 2020 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 CEFC33A0E3D for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:20:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.948 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.948 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.948, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DkCunMh5-n15 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:20:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20B1C3A0E33 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:20:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1598296830; bh=XSpq9vki+Po8v4b/2dUUG1wTJQwv4H2MN0tVk+avmu0=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=FK1x2tWwub1sVhiM9X9ZMlpxLg8lnz2ZVI+5n/pqOAVip4z+84HEbvzl9vlKqNV5y nJYm+L3gi1pOrAdH5aEtrJXzGVPe9FjeRyF4QJzv+IeEIQk4LJNIFvSMcl1aP7cE5f sSP3NDAxQHGGy+Yqfj7F7BGgqIDUCrDcWXNR/WJs= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from [192.168.178.124] ([84.171.152.35]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx005 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MmlXA-1kruUS30mU-00jrZb for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:20:30 +0200 To: xml2rfc@ietf.org References: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: <59ece5f4-d44c-e67a-fb39-c66da9406b90@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:20:29 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:nr3x8KP5JVMHCLMwVFxHQAqW+pB9iqZcSHU1U/4kwAW39uuUO8K fz0W5WwfLQKXl4SkN5cRxPJkZZXlJq0M0P1Ep+EWvqecgYUcGWdtqmTDHjgLayC+GQOfRQc 7Es4FMM8a47wF3f3dvt/ePcC3AFg6cH/5oLFlPV2R9G9UT75/tcCHsCgNPm3UHNU8itSQ60 IJjYuFdWbzgMwr4hj/utA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:hdd7pSqIhAI=:hYUX3n7zyywKoGAV0r5+xI oN+CQwfLwZgeFxG2MBdt5Id9yqvHU327477tE1uXZTwW5k0GofJNsTf50SiLj6EP2Z6tqouwE Kz+jy4yjZX/bPZNVd1C5b5bgOAoUx1Qu/WcPqiF1nqCRgimMKLbRrs0Fq3Ahl7HWKxuQRBjQL 9deqbkQVLnhZt2QivvwFvCbWANGGraVgyDpsliN/tJj67jrX/JtbM1AuP1E3TuaZZDEOAOyR+ WH2bHkNk8gPI02OY3zaxTjL7xCmDjkREqrqLhzx+ACmdUC+ULBnFaA9Vxe9j0MtcF4ElSMDNc BNtUMY7xs2QAYYAbKBtK6SozQHVPxo8hTvKm7Dw94+VwIfpbx5f9TpZaNTkInyqXo5GX/7CRg lWSI/Z0OPZ/d8eh7i4uWhnKNav4iJS8zZvoNcAAbxycyOh6eHIE+czyfGxY8S6LnjbNctLSgm /P8s1CLj/bgdHdRS+ioA+pex1q2VBsp0lFrVszlcJKQl3PIaLsJORaPaEGS8vYf/ICrmDGCSN Zy9dX11TPdFmcwwX4VgWvedC6a1zUHEaP6vFk2giToT8zIDIfTX7W1ezSmpbDtIBB2w3v5lhk 7ButD+R2hZvfD3XwN18HY9KKsFktu37+bq28gmfbK5tSvvvcHyRUpEwcEruJBHtlwtVyZa3ul N70EeFL21A398bjUiVi9KwLyWicbYkFfkA9ktQzgTquccdvmZgaEYxZQcuVMnu3Ju7ozcBO6e G9wgJjP7B2C3aQv+Ie2lwcg/BON5ClWAfYyYteEUMtKPtp8m9s0veJ7+3pWyjRxDzwQZtpLzw 8RohznTtpWEbw7ECg4u+7zhs3foVElOQhC8rzHIv839BdOMKb4mx5eOMw7NC9oFfOb8r6liuE 1n8n35RiYD6YdCsDyJJ6ZPcnzkKKB3tlPsRw9j1MwW04og+8Tck7DhRArw07m+mNeaUbJ1A2n mhZNqYxMneNnBhN7N0VgB6aufHPlGXHiAySPJNfcCwZqL6Q8C7hwHDRNOxnMllgdzD22DO7+H DkBqJKOFyTlF7bXRVXbs8NAQhN2Qqx7W0AUDKFjInbe0cvdrr3l/vt60BGYsMYoFTmn2gNW90 LkFss/6eG3Dc/fbYK0i3geshjqUdOyWPRECNT+9YjPdLD2nsYEgRDnY8I+Edd4xuwdvyB10Al yjMYMWyut/iXH0mZtlDLtKQc60hs1raa87DfEM4wJNH6Cg64fzNXCP9Ef3l2Yv3g+adrHX1oF a/rb3zDBsaSlM86FqARP0vkMqpNr7zFhuQv4Psg== Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 19:20:39 -0000 Am 24.08.2020 um 16:36 schrieb David R. Oran: > ... > xml2rfc can=E2=80=99t seem to be cajoled to output this. It rejects an <= em> > element inside a title element, so I can=E2=80=99t put the title in ital= ics. If > I try to put the title in quotes (the alternative formulation), I get > doubled double-quotes at the front of the title element. > ... /me confused. The title is automatically put into double quotes. What am I missing here? Best regards, Julian From nobody Mon Aug 24 12:31:01 2020 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 6DD0D3A0A9D for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:30:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.003 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cF6vLci7uJk4 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:30:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1BA83A0A7D for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:30:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.217.102] (p5089ae91.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.174.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Bb2KV72GdzyQb; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:30:54 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <59ece5f4-d44c-e67a-fb39-c66da9406b90@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:30:54 +0200 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 619990254.562048-ef9bbb4efe90921d80b7903a58458140 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> <59ece5f4-d44c-e67a-fb39-c66da9406b90@gmx.de> To: Julian Reschke X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 19:30:59 -0000 On 2020-08-24, at 21:20, Julian Reschke wrote: >=20 > The title is automatically put into double quotes. What am I missing = here? I think that the inproceedings was munched into the title. The seriesinfo hack doesn=E2=80=99t do that. (Fixing the doilit subtitle bug right now.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Mon Aug 24 12:44:53 2020 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 4DFC53A0B55; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:44:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.003 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wNgyvpO1ivKU; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:44:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D32C73A0B5A; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:44:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.217.102] (p5089ae91.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.174.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Bb2dX29K7zyRm; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:44:48 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:44:47 +0200 Cc: XML2RFC Interest Group X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 619991087.762308-d61abea0114f8086b3ce7087f0250fe7 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> <59ece5f4-d44c-e67a-fb39-c66da9406b90@gmx.de> To: rfc-markdown@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1) Archived-At: Subject: [xml2rfc] 1.3.11: doilit: no longer ignore subtitles X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 19:44:52 -0000 On 2020-08-24, at 21:30, Carsten Bormann wrote: >=20 > (Fixing the doilit subtitle bug right now.) 1.3.11: The auxiliary tool doilit no longer ignores subtitles. For merging title and subtitle(s) into a single RFCXML title element, it = uses the CMOS (*) convention of separating title from subtitle with a = colon and multiple subtitles with a semicolon from each other (RFC 7322 = is mute on the issue and defers to CMOS for style issues in general). This probably needs to be updated on the server behind bibxml7 to have a = widespread effect. Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten (*) [CMOS]: Chicago Manual of Style, 16th ed. Chicago: University of Chicago = Press, 2010. From nobody Mon Aug 24 12:48:57 2020 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 55C733A0B6B for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:48:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.003 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NkRYtPiHKT12 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:48:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D7273A0B65 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:48:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.217.102] (p5089ae91.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.174.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Bb2kC2DD9zyS3; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:48:51 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:48:50 +0200 Cc: XML2RFC Interest Group X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 619991330.602631-c763b8d28538d6ab0de9d9a8a1225a51 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> To: Randy Bush X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 19:48:55 -0000 On 2020-08-24, at 21:04, Randy Bush wrote: >=20 > while you are at it, the inverse would be nice, > as i have to cite rfcs in papers. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8798/bibtex/ @misc{rfc8798, series =3D {Request for Comments}, number =3D 8798, howpublished =3D {RFC 8798}, publisher =3D {RFC Editor}, doi =3D {10.17487/RFC8798}, url =3D {https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8798.txt}, author =3D {Carsten Bormann}, title =3D {{Additional Units for Sensor = Measurement Lists (SenML)}}, pagetotal =3D 9, year =3D 2020, month =3D jun, abstract =3D {The Sensor Measurement Lists (SenML) media type = supports the indication of units for a quantity represented. This short = document registers a number of additional unit names in the IANA = registry for units in SenML. It also defines a registry for secondary = units that cannot be in SenML's main registry, as they are derived by = linear transformation from units already in that registry.}, } Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Mon Aug 24 13:02:44 2020 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 DB8833A0B98 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:02:42 -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=[SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kFYnF_e90RsH for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:02:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5F5D3A0B97 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:02:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [198.180.150.2] (helo=mail.rg.net) by psg.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1kAIfw-000Daf-Gc; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 20:02:41 +0000 Received: from 162-195-241-81.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net ([162.195.241.81] helo=[192.168.56.1]) by mail.rg.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kAIfv-0005J5-Fm; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 20:02:39 +0000 From: "Randy Bush" To: "Carsten Bormann" Cc: "XML2RFC Interest Group" Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:02:37 -0700 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5671) Message-ID: <62D33C4F-7A69-43A6-A8E8-24A44627B233@psg.com> In-Reply-To: References: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; markup=markdown Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 20:02:43 -0000 >> while you are at it, the inverse would be nice, >> as i have to cite rfcs in papers. > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8798/bibtex/ ooooo! thanks. randy From nobody Mon Aug 24 13:57:33 2020 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 0B9703A0C82 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:57:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.146 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.146 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.948, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lnp4Sk1PiJna for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:57:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pj1-x1031.google.com (mail-pj1-x1031.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1031]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB9813A0C81 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:57:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1031.google.com with SMTP id mw10so73056pjb.2 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:57:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ri3pmUfeNDa8Ec57Xfpc42FwMIlr1aFJ/WEtDrxPExI=; b=UZRtyQz+6WSPvV5vOAhYEAT3LetVOWebS6soQnXOR44xOJtm4yLhxuzXwFiaMsTgiV Okj3Pq0C4PMMw6w908sfQYB9/Z2N1QkzcqomkAmeafdcJlabjvvXJ2+5m5r1mUEth0bf dg61Wh0dysf+WRGWvkZEn4b6eCNqIMmWpFJYjhMCkEb1h/Wlu+uz7+bziWksz4Lt2Leu bGnnXQUpz5UOC0kziI5MYzDPEKfDbAjVxdJ1RWgOexAY6YMOSWe3sSVyvcAepqdJzDU9 BS+POCr7D2opon+gJcJ+t5PRoWcGTOXupVHoHGN+df6sEk7hgowqiawMKrtBcm+kHcG+ jiGw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ri3pmUfeNDa8Ec57Xfpc42FwMIlr1aFJ/WEtDrxPExI=; b=WIxsKdyWhIAJrJwRMjA3ka72737RgUs4ISJ8WCYmOP/JfCtKP0Oftcr7BTH3TZemiX NoODdNgoQ5SnzxgF9zVddHzlDqO512Q3OO+0xND9jIL0OMmhX9W57Hb4fXmk6y6XTyLG qSpaSd1oK0Q8FrdSf7sNVzwHRHaOevXKfprqHhTT+qlljS4K0+bFVXsiARmJ6/qg5MuT Ci2t6T5kye2xqE9l3IL2J0ppsLLkJvoYW58hYjxzGpzUJ54k2anfl6P2iwzgIVjhuoty nZf4N1/+QsKyfnnnk0vknZZQMSAQ/52NEceMBjCiuxj3WZ6pbfhsymI6Gu1ve8x8mOAa uwqg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531FTL68e2PJZwH+7h+Ts36DosvO1gGZ6WTfE/4cvsM4id7ftIk0 XvlIlOTNWzgb9op50VOq4Ti21Kb3+eFGzA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzTdo1q9S8IA032qQKExxvS/Ff8RLkacx9zRkKMaAI3/PguRTvv8Grg9iF33OVn9UdZuIISLw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:4d05:: with SMTP id mw5mr890333pjb.76.1598302650068; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:57:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([151.210.139.192]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t25sm13153837pfl.198.2020.08.24.13.57.27 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:57:29 -0700 (PDT) To: Carsten Bormann , Randy Bush Cc: XML2RFC Interest Group References: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 08:57:26 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 20:57:32 -0000 On 25-Aug-20 07:48, Carsten Bormann wrote: > url = {https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8798.txt}, That's wrong for recent RFCs. It should perhaps be https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8798.html, but actually the DOI points to https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8798 and that is valid for old and new format RFCs. So, url = {https://rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8798}, Regards Brian From nobody Mon Aug 24 14:03:26 2020 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 677DF3A0C87 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:03:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.003 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WgbLW9bbMjT7 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:03:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1ADFE3A0C7C for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:03:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.16.42.100] (p5089ae91.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.174.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Bb4N35qcLzyS3; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 23:03:15 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 23:03:14 +0200 Cc: Randy Bush , XML2RFC Interest Group X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 619995794.4743021-49fde1bd858270271377a70e7af38801 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7D4A6D95-20C1-41E3-9EA3-8EB40DA3CEE5@tzi.org> References: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> To: Brian E Carpenter X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:03:24 -0000 On 2020-08-24, at 22:57, Brian E Carpenter = wrote: >=20 > url =3D {https://rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8798}, BTW, this is a web page that suggests I should download Adobe Reader. You couldn=E2=80=99t make this up while on the wildest drugs. Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Mon Aug 24 14:08:12 2020 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 790DF3A0C8E for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:08:10 -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=[SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vGW5xxRgKSRk for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:08:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 706A13A0C8B for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:08:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kAJhG-0002vO-5P; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:08:06 +0000 Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:08:05 -0700 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: Carsten Bormann Cc: Brian E Carpenter , XML2RFC Interest Group In-Reply-To: <7D4A6D95-20C1-41E3-9EA3-8EB40DA3CEE5@tzi.org> References: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> <7D4A6D95-20C1-41E3-9EA3-8EB40DA3CEE5@tzi.org> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/26.3 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:08:10 -0000 > BTW, this is a web page that suggests I should download Adobe Reader. it could have said flash From nobody Mon Aug 24 14:33:03 2020 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 9C6583A0CC8 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:33:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.147 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.147 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.948, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7tE0hpnQXZRz for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:33:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pg1-x52e.google.com (mail-pg1-x52e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD2963A0CC7 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:33:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x52e.google.com with SMTP id d19so5276867pgl.10 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:33:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=d4Y8tTNWm3FYZzQI40XmTDCSEGO0SIht5m5Zrpw2tio=; b=jyTbCS8aju3NfEA6rH0/zV/pXgLQQzcXtIUZskBklZYo6nfIuZMmMQo9yc9aDgYQnA ZQ7NsOgCFDEe6YAXQ8iVAwQERlkGwHjMjswrsu7V0sybULZHF/o0cxiU2wotZP1/hbNJ P25MizFOVnqOwEvI9MOUsGico47NNII5TIDIxCSlu875GiNvd9wfX5C7IQncW7n8SSIx FoIJ56iowDD4IGSi2HXBB4czsdH0nAW0bIOEsmnBeR7yZe1rvuVcdwegRCEBh1LF+MIf PGhPZ4pjiv4K9SPs+3icf3GZQ9SrZ97F92liZ0r+Z/ym70R5kl+6dvw1RClBRLqTI5GM WKQw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=d4Y8tTNWm3FYZzQI40XmTDCSEGO0SIht5m5Zrpw2tio=; b=KQIGdktEmnElFVwwJBJJwvmqIMxadnl85jSrnP+uM8dZfmM8QJaSwDVoyiGhLkcwAi XZ05mY9Qgw3xkTx0GC/WSn4I6TjqxH+aLvyylnYxLxvFpGXeTyEqJqG1ex4L3gCcPReK isjAOysAo27lJbTcybjgV14qgfNscBGVs4zPqa+99BpgvzP5vJcHJTsWBESBr+JXr6Ox 5vfgNcDhFqJWXhf8N/L0b+D82aJSpbzOEMMqgAw20tCFiVei/OnMl0/ai0VFwidZYtCS /EikW/e96KKsm5tA3bFhHF2NM2jxFyDDK7LC8gZ493eZYFm1jajFxmRWkqz87DHY2G4M P/sQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531R6/WIuLdtBEw5bR/HToktDqFWpN3YQQpiI8A3CC2gDCfd9aNp GUGderDbef1D8ui2yCX9QFw0VRSd3szNyw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzeSfOvI4NbN384KhXidwfy5l5WEzn8V3+ABa2MEBT2XGgioeCVjDgiKDbCpAh2L75M/ZO0/A== X-Received: by 2002:a65:58c4:: with SMTP id e4mr4547595pgu.108.1598304780865; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:33:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([151.210.139.192]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a7sm12356591pfd.194.2020.08.24.14.32.58 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:33:00 -0700 (PDT) To: Randy Bush , Carsten Bormann Cc: XML2RFC Interest Group References: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> <7D4A6D95-20C1-41E3-9EA3-8EB40DA3CEE5@tzi.org> From: Brian E Carpenter Message-ID: <5368323e-2b7b-2593-dc30-37b40d9051e3@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 09:32:57 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:33:03 -0000 On 25-Aug-20 09:08, Randy Bush wrote: >> BTW, this is a web page that suggests I should download Adobe Reader. > > it could have said flash I suggest you take the aesthetic complaint to the RFC Editor. That is nevertheless the source of the canonical version (txt for old ones, xml for new ones) so for formal citation purposes I don't see what alternative there is. Brian From nobody Mon Aug 24 16:04:52 2020 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 C9E833A0F68 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 16:04:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.003 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4VvuWE4qU9Rg for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 16:04:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6ACD43A0F69 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 16:04:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.16.42.100] (p5089ae91.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.174.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Bb74B3fKGzySH; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 01:04:42 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <5368323e-2b7b-2593-dc30-37b40d9051e3@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 01:04:44 +0200 Cc: XML2RFC Interest Group X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 620003084.211673-462ff14c7586f2a6cdbeeb548fdd35d6 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <72B5135E-64DB-413D-B4A6-A83CA9FDFBC9@orandom.net> <7D4A6D95-20C1-41E3-9EA3-8EB40DA3CEE5@tzi.org> <5368323e-2b7b-2593-dc30-37b40d9051e3@gmail.com> To: Brian E Carpenter X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 23:04:51 -0000 (The subject line is useless by now; this is a tangent (links to RFCs) = of a tangent (bibtex for RFCs) of the original discussion. Wrong = mailing list, too. EWONTFIX.) > On 2020-08-24, at 23:32, Brian E Carpenter = wrote: >=20 > On 25-Aug-20 09:08, Randy Bush wrote: >>> BTW, this is a web page that suggests I should download Adobe = Reader. >>=20 >> it could have said flash >=20 > I suggest you take the aesthetic complaint to the RFC Editor. I think Randy's comment may have been a bit opaque (it sure hit the = mark), but that is a different construction site. Anyway: > That is nevertheless the source of the canonical version (txt for old = ones, xml for new ones) so for formal citation purposes I don't see what = alternative there is. Well, for a very long, long time the stable, and useful link for RFC = 8798 would have been=20 http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8798 Which is slowly being eclipsed by (sometimes linked from the above): https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8798 One of these two is still my personal preference for a link I would like = to see in my papers, even if it isn=E2=80=99t canonical (in my part of = the world, the only more canonical link is, unfortunately, = https://doi.org/10.17487/RFC8798 =E2=80=94 which redirects to = https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8798.) Yes, the http:// had to change. But clearly, we are missing out on [1] here to a larger extent than = necessary. (I can only hope the recent discussion about RFC governance doesn=E2=80=99= t make us change the domain name =E2=80=9Crfc-editor.org=E2=80=9D.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten [1]: https://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html "Cool URIs don't = change=E2=80=9D From nobody Tue Aug 25 11:44:11 2020 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 BB0AA3A0824 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 11:44:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.049 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.049 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=beZusS/t; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=C3S/aJg3 Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dFy2WDGQ0TQE for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 11:44:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BF753A081D for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 11:44:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 67190 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2020 18:44:03 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=10671.5f455bf3.k2008; bh=Nf41ArWIZp2LblTyqurFqqfL5W3E1u9e0/aLi6azEo0=; b=beZusS/tkxOKWst2je08UOogCGdiGe3iI0iCzxUP3i3cNJ3OdoLQ93VtIFUAAi/nqwj/4vg5P4AQ639EFZLJroWoD4QzNiagjZSlR/MZItj6pn2IBP6HCXpoLHO+djT4gBkgk+Jx/5efGiQjtrBCIxwfjxvCRwdH2FLaqZG9mSI0Y2bqe4tPpJgwmPKwO++hntJKTw6cFo/tL2OdRsndkO2T9xTDQ0GSGvSPACGCwxwMA3oFJhKFWjcNv5hr4/fAz2XJ6dgS4qjoRhbwu6leFrBxm+DVAAB5+RWna4pRZhEVdg5NGfxAjmez3MbVlFXnAooRu3QY0PpMq1SWXky6zQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=10671.5f455bf3.k2008; bh=Nf41ArWIZp2LblTyqurFqqfL5W3E1u9e0/aLi6azEo0=; b=C3S/aJg38edupCgahIfzQxel5hqlsvnr3df4GwobRp4oSuRIpCn+YBjsHjns2tVNtXsAQ6w3gR+ox5JjbaMXp+B6aq2l+frABWh6fA6COqFFnfaB+QtYGoPDvfhTHk5HuHLGHekZd6O9tiBPjwD44TDcnYaJw/3zcRA4mwSD0sHy/OJNsq9V/t4cIcN5EJ8kYX14E38P5urD+YKkJU9drZ7R2GfZoZbHQpxfRqgQKvVF1XwmLatNOPSvbrglJxpbG42KsMVc7RxteQriWuBIYgNCnL1xUKwhHMpJ+vlFqWfTLqN5uWxFIKukPirMxaxt5Dsh9Qy2mU3sIE9ovKCHBQ== Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 25 Aug 2020 18:44:02 -0000 Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 424031F26A48; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 14:44:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: 25 Aug 2020 14:44:02 -0400 Message-Id: <20200825184402.424031F26A48@ary.qy> From: "John Levine" To: xml2rfc@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <7D4A6D95-20C1-41E3-9EA3-8EB40DA3CEE5@tzi.org> Organization: Taughannock Networks X-Headerized: yes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] PDF software, was Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 18:44:09 -0000 In article <7D4A6D95-20C1-41E3-9EA3-8EB40DA3CEE5@tzi.org> you write: >On 2020-08-24, at 22:57, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> >> url = {https://rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8798}, > >BTW, this is a web page that suggests I should download Adobe Reader. >You couldn’t make this up while on the wildest drugs. While I realize that the vast majority of current web browsers already know how to handle PDFs, there's still people at the end of the long tail using browsers that don't. What advice would you offer them? Adobe's reader works and has been ported to every platform anyone has ever heard of. It seems as good a suggestion as any. R's, John PS: That link has been there for many years and we've never gotten a complaint I can recall. What's different now? From nobody Tue Aug 25 12:45:02 2020 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 E00553A0964 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 12:45:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.003 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QnxjZMbX3mO7 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 12:44:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 727783A095E for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 12:44:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from client-0165.vpn.uni-bremen.de (client-0165.vpn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.107.165]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4BbfbC5kGTzyXq; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 21:44:55 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <20200825184402.424031F26A48@ary.qy> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 21:44:55 +0200 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 620077495.1622421-1983c4fc81a8535cc2492b25df775254 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <8575DDDA-A825-460D-A9EB-3807CC44A23A@tzi.org> References: <20200825184402.424031F26A48@ary.qy> To: John Levine X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] PDF software, was Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 19:45:02 -0000 Hi John, I apologize for never having looked closely at the RFC editor info = pages; so far, they hadn=E2=80=99t been elevated to a status that would = have many users look at them (me obviously being an example for that). > While I realize that the vast majority of current web browsers already > know how to handle PDFs, there's still people at the end of the long > tail using browsers that don't. What advice would you offer them? >=20 > Adobe's reader works and has been ported to every platform anyone has > ever heard of. It seems as good a suggestion as any. >=20 > R's, > John >=20 > PS: That link has been there for many years and we've never gotten a > complaint I can recall. What's different now? OK, let me start with the question at the end. What=E2=80=99s different = now? It=E2=80=99s 2020. People who have been around computers (which = probably is a valid description of our clientele) know how to handle = PDF. =20 But, OK, 4 people are born every second who don=E2=80=99t. There is a = minute chance that they make it through life not learning about PDF = before opening up an RFC info page and wanting to read a PDF. Or, more = likely, they do know, but the system they happen to use at that instance = is ancient enough not to be able to handle PDF. What do we want to do to people that are clueless about PDF or that find = themselves at an ancient system? Probably not offer a convenient = affordance to mindlessly install a specific product that is known to = have been one of the most useful entry points for system security = attacks [1]. We don=E2=80=99t need to endorse a specific product any more. Our PDFs = don=E2=80=99t need the proprietary features of that product (which are = the most useful part for an attacker). We don=E2=80=99t need to help = perpetuate the dogged myth that you need that product to work with PDFs = (*). So what should be done instead? When you get a coordinate in Wikipedia, this is not shown as a Google = Maps link, but you are led to a page that offers links to a choice of = map products that enable you to look at a map situated at that = coordinate. Many people probably do click on Google Maps then, but that = interstitial reinforces the concept of Pluralism of Operators and = Technologies [2], which should be dear to our heart. Design for Choice = [3], not only our protocols, but also our websites. Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten [1]: https://thehackernews.com/search/label/Adobe%20Reader (random link) (*): I=E2=80=99ve seen IETF chairs use that product on platforms that = have better native capabilities. Makes me wonder=E2=80=A6 [2]: = https://www.identityblog.com/stories/2005/05/13/TheLawsOfIdentity.pdf = (and not just of identity) [3]: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/633025.633059= From nobody Tue Aug 25 13:38:15 2020 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 C06A23A0B95 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 13:38:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=xDz5+Shp; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=UaHacuw5 Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4ycWVS_BjhYZ for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 13:38:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DB593A0B94 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 13:38:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 92759 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2020 20:38:09 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type; s=16a55.5f4576b1.k2008; i=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=sKjPsu9nAC3G4xU7lKrvODmr011i/EgT54o56+NKhpc=; b=xDz5+ShpG+coIrFFZ5KsyQHZUzng5nsigvRHXR/oHjAmusAWL6NfQiXPFCvpTxhO7zADmZQPSM0eS2HVewBslQRBSpZajChGOYFhpbbSdqJTqFDWVTGhkE+GZzMBocNRd+1FfliQxU01MsBTpknIq14whIeqL7qiavGRNrATvIiQEAS7rRWmN5QfjF4IQ0Zdzl51D9zbHPno+p81xahFLrT1+2bIFfnpZCmXYjH2CRsWUP0lqo2f/fMReCKkzLLPEsd1SsHTVgoSmvjKYoyh8ssbosz8OikoQjClXkbJIbyj466CSN6o2Z0/n2aRlbuyEhCXfeQHgFe+jH4JHjYQsQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type; s=16a55.5f4576b1.k2008; olt=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=sKjPsu9nAC3G4xU7lKrvODmr011i/EgT54o56+NKhpc=; b=UaHacuw53CAYpgJO1SLnCSdO+34ijlrAlRA1bJ1+SXQr4ui+p/ZjpOD2/CtvRwhzHVQMKg+51fcVCglYxxQk+L6HZbuXIWuCjSLkeQu+d+gxlJKo8Kk4XnBxtWUvMbX+B8rmxVhCncon1P9l7eR4NbSVazEQoX3dUmYsdwN0mGcviXIL9ffKKtvV710KV+z/czTRp9Zyqqg1kkteAgj9sqmrlzKDOkrL+MSLct94HfOj8uLIRJZuw7Hj2kRHGspTkmPoMy3wsqJAk9V21Bk14eUhzZ/AZU3/GqyHpiQKRCas/3b/hbL/h4yzXAHmSr6cZNi2hebGU2GTvftf83yDZQ== Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, johnl@iecc.com) via TCP6; 25 Aug 2020 20:38:09 -0000 Date: 25 Aug 2020 16:38:08 -0400 Message-ID: <61dc124f-f772-d232-4424-8fe4ac99e0f1@taugh.com> From: "John R Levine" To: "Carsten Bormann" Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <8575DDDA-A825-460D-A9EB-3807CC44A23A@tzi.org> References: <20200825184402.424031F26A48@ary.qy> <8575DDDA-A825-460D-A9EB-3807CC44A23A@tzi.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] PDF software, was Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 20:38:14 -0000 > So what should be done instead? > > When you get a coordinate in Wikipedia, this is not shown as a Google Maps link, but you are led to a page that offers links to a choice of map products that enable you to look at a map situated at that coordinate. Many people probably do click on Google Maps then, but that interstitial reinforces the concept of Pluralism of Operators and Technologies [2], which should be dear to our heart. Design for Choice [3], not only our protocols, but also our websites. As we say, please send text. Regards, John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly From nobody Tue Aug 25 14:30:30 2020 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 132C03A0C10 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 14:30:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.003 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xxRYlYdaME0W for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 14:30:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 399223A0C0F for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 14:30:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from client-0165.vpn.uni-bremen.de (client-0165.vpn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.107.165]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Bbhwv5ZgJzyXq; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 23:30:23 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <61dc124f-f772-d232-4424-8fe4ac99e0f1@taugh.com> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 23:30:23 +0200 Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 620083823.125531-08263d42000830e306ac4403fcbf2be2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20200825184402.424031F26A48@ary.qy> <8575DDDA-A825-460D-A9EB-3807CC44A23A@tzi.org> <61dc124f-f772-d232-4424-8fe4ac99e0f1@taugh.com> To: John R Levine X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] PDF software, was Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 21:30:29 -0000 On 2020-08-25, at 22:38, John R Levine wrote: >=20 > As we say, please send text. The best text may be no text (i.e., not offering any help with = displaying PDFs). If you do want such help on the RFC editor pages, I could definitely = write this, but it sure will be opinionated. Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Thu Aug 27 09:58:26 2020 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 EF6DD3A0BC7 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 09:58:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.027 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.027 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.948, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nostrum.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yBrtZSkFB0R6 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 09:58:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6A393A074B for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 09:58:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unescapeable.local ([47.186.30.41]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.16.1/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 07RGwJI1036979 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 27 Aug 2020 11:58:21 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1598547503; bh=Zrflfdrp2Vg2PCCRAr7clU8yrtgl/bAT2kc+zSI0hN0=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=LOCnt5djMXqZ3AvTVu6a8DmqkwvDw9DDk95iKICLZtM3d0OYai4TQ8P0UOx1dHdQQ E8o1BEwl2w2L2OFEnOCCYyg+p9J/Zfk5TQnrXT25Kyh0WnlH/nRFZT612rDK+owCNS NTiTWVsmemIVPRcARHlbiRAnwp3gQ/OYX4e4Rl/w= X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host [47.186.30.41] claimed to be unescapeable.local To: John R Levine , Carsten Bormann Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org References: <20200825184402.424031F26A48@ary.qy> <8575DDDA-A825-460D-A9EB-3807CC44A23A@tzi.org> <61dc124f-f772-d232-4424-8fe4ac99e0f1@taugh.com> From: Robert Sparks Message-ID: <825ca81e-2ce5-10f9-6103-75b355db5dee@nostrum.com> Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 11:58:18 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <61dc124f-f772-d232-4424-8fe4ac99e0f1@taugh.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] PDF software, was Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 16:58:25 -0000 On 8/25/20 3:38 PM, John R Levine wrote: >> So what should be done instead? >> >> When you get a coordinate in Wikipedia, this is not shown as a Google >> Maps link, but you are led to a page that offers links to a choice of >> map products that enable you to look at a map situated at that >> coordinate.  Many people probably do click on Google Maps then, but >> that interstitial reinforces the concept of Pluralism of Operators >> and Technologies [2], which should be dear to our heart.  Design for >> Choice [3], not only our protocols, but also our websites. > > As we say, please send text. What about replacing the link with a link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PDF_software? > > Regards, > John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY > Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly > > _______________________________________________ > xml2rfc mailing list > xml2rfc@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc From nobody Thu Aug 27 10:08:44 2020 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 220AA3A0C75 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 10:08:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=Vq4ub125; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=hhV4nYcT Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3XL5oSKa4BDu for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 10:08:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED66F3A0C52 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 10:08:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 43144 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2020 17:08:37 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type; s=a885.5f47e895.k2008; i=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=Z+SF9Ywt8ct8jltFzkymJzkZT+qQcPlW+6n5MzAEVdE=; b=Vq4ub125tivvaNe7U+aczrVbkRfIyTHWDVZ3R2r9QO10SUQfb5jp4tr60+cq6iSSNTbKHIyHTcYVwfjCit2DS/4sLQwSB9IyqjkVyVC9wP9DajE0rZXZmq3vimaJCK02OcbLwLRmVMxSe3rYB/dabtqd9K9KdxS6dfbYeDNhoExxbPI1G6cgKfehP1vmccnWyIHszgQgXFGf+lfKlnlhAEC7l4/ENNCFqUzee4e4ZLfosBkKOnqOSUDTUAo7GQyvNOEBrYjIPWcusIVgr9E23PPiO1FfGutA8iN7LIkBr3GipmI58HHpfcsp0ZVPI1vDbCy7dD4IvtB3H+V2H+tsFw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type; s=a885.5f47e895.k2008; olt=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=Z+SF9Ywt8ct8jltFzkymJzkZT+qQcPlW+6n5MzAEVdE=; b=hhV4nYcTPYKD3rzTH6juLhZDwO67WmkcpuXjkHQeGgiGnHA12niDCiOHXF/GwFgK30YA6jC8HP9ZcHIY5HPAo88d1pibCKNwJgqK1OdGFsB0FB/wCC92dz8lvQY2Wq73p2vbL87m7ku+AJSRs7df7y+QTbH4iGp0BKUtzhrw/RCef5rnalJp/G2RKS9up+hLULqPQThhohqb1a49lwLyJD9AvVBVKqAzGqbm5nNXvihBmEkj/sdjq2BCr8f4drHrlOgEaiRsCC++dND5mFyJ5JVdmFpSCBOz8dW5vSZ8vFb/HdA2frK1flCB9Qf3iIBH8bw9C4fKyb3zg9Xn3kV/Zg== Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, johnl@iecc.com) via TCP6; 27 Aug 2020 17:08:37 -0000 Date: 27 Aug 2020 13:08:37 -0400 Message-ID: <529198f9-3849-556c-5dc8-9fab3e6a72da@taugh.com> From: "John R Levine" To: "Robert Sparks" , "Carsten Bormann" Cc: xml2rfc@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <825ca81e-2ce5-10f9-6103-75b355db5dee@nostrum.com> References: <20200825184402.424031F26A48@ary.qy> <8575DDDA-A825-460D-A9EB-3807CC44A23A@tzi.org> <61dc124f-f772-d232-4424-8fe4ac99e0f1@taugh.com> <825ca81e-2ce5-10f9-6103-75b355db5dee@nostrum.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] PDF software, was Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 17:08:41 -0000 On Thu, 27 Aug 2020, Robert Sparks wrote: >> As we say, please send text. > What about replacing the link with a link to > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PDF_software? At this point, I am inclined to agree with Cartsten that if your browser doesn't already know how to show you a PDF, you've got more problems than any link can solve. Regards, John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly From nobody Thu Aug 27 10:09:11 2020 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 C1C323A0C75 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 10:09:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Wm-oIcYghlES for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 10:09:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C6C63A0C52 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 10:09:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from client-0019.vpn.uni-bremen.de (client-0019.vpn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.107.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Bcq2Q0NjdzyRb; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 19:09:02 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <825ca81e-2ce5-10f9-6103-75b355db5dee@nostrum.com> Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 19:09:01 +0200 Cc: John R Levine , xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 620240941.52336-fe8843a0fac7dcd9c35f356ebd9ed2e8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4E20E6CA-6D8B-4D42-BBEC-B95534C6F0FB@tzi.org> References: <20200825184402.424031F26A48@ary.qy> <8575DDDA-A825-460D-A9EB-3807CC44A23A@tzi.org> <61dc124f-f772-d232-4424-8fe4ac99e0f1@taugh.com> <825ca81e-2ce5-10f9-6103-75b355db5dee@nostrum.com> To: Robert Sparks X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [xml2rfc] PDF software, was Possibly an RFCed question rather than a tools question, but here goes: References to conference papers X-BeenThere: xml2rfc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 17:09:07 -0000 On 2020-08-27, at 18:58, Robert Sparks wrote: >=20 > What about replacing the link with a link to = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PDF_software? That occurred to me, too. It is certainly a second best to writing some specific help, but it is a = bit defocused from the task =E2=80=9CI want to read a PDF document=E2=80=9D= . E.g., it doesn=E2=80=99t point out that you don=E2=80=99t need =E2=80=9C= PDF software=E2=80=9D because the browser already does it (myth #1 to be = busted). The list of software includes PDF creation software as well as = viewing software, and the matrix with the platforms is ordered in such a = way to you can=E2=80=99t simply link to the viewing software. I would have used the link as a =E2=80=9Cfurther information=E2=80=9D = catch-all at the end of a much shorter =E2=80=9Chow-to=E2=80=9D section. = See = https://www.howtogeek.com/360744/what-is-a-pdf-file-and-how-do-i-open-one/= for a not quite perfect example of such a section. Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten