From tony@att.com Tue Apr 6 12:28:42 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc-dev@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc-dev@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B47583A67FA for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 12:28:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.197 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.402, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 55eVeVRgBk9Y for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 12:28:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail167.messagelabs.com (mail167.messagelabs.com [216.82.253.179]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B9EB3A6888 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 12:25:42 -0700 (PDT) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: tony@att.com X-Msg-Ref: server-6.tower-167.messagelabs.com!1270581938!12813872!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.4; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [144.160.20.146] Received: (qmail 31120 invoked from network); 6 Apr 2010 19:25:39 -0000 Received: from sbcsmtp7.sbc.com (HELO mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) (144.160.20.146) by server-6.tower-167.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 6 Apr 2010 19:25:39 -0000 Received: from enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o36JPPDg016703 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 15:25:25 -0400 Received: from klpd017.kcdc.att.com (klpd017.kcdc.att.com [135.188.40.86]) by mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o36JPJpO016567 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 15:25:19 -0400 Received: from kcdc.att.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by klpd017.kcdc.att.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o36JPWmE013157 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 14:25:32 -0500 Received: from maillennium.att.com (dns.maillennium.att.com [135.25.114.99]) by klpd017.kcdc.att.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o36JPS4o013109 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 14:25:29 -0500 Received: from [135.70.219.3] (vpn-135-70-219-3.vpn.east.att.com[135.70.219.3]) by maillennium.att.com (mailgw1) with ESMTP id <20100406192528gw100b8ijfe> (Authid: tony); Tue, 6 Apr 2010 19:25:28 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [135.70.219.3] Message-ID: <4BBB8AA7.7000206@att.com> Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 15:25:27 -0400 From: Tony Hansen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: XML Developer List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [xml2rfc-dev] next up for xml2rfc.tcl X-BeenThere: xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about particulars of xml2rfc development and code." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 19:28:42 -0000 I think the next step up for xml2rfc that we discussed will be to get the RFC boilerplate up to snuff. Alice, Julian, do you have a handle on what's left to do for that? Tony From julian.reschke@gmx.de Tue Apr 6 12:59:05 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc-dev@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc-dev@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A35443A68ED for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 12:59:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 43Z3cMSdqGzN for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 12:59:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id AC1473A6847 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 12:59:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 06 Apr 2010 19:59:00 -0000 Received: from p508FCD79.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.33]) [80.143.205.121] by mail.gmx.net (mp069) with SMTP; 06 Apr 2010 21:59:00 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1915285 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+v2JU5M6+vfE86jV0WATL4lM/szwg7j5gD41KSTo yb3h4v8CDQxsJP Message-ID: <4BBB927C.2010406@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 21:58:52 +0200 From: Julian Reschke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060516 Thunderbird/1.5.0.4 Mnenhy/0.7.4.666 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tony Hansen References: <4BBB8AA7.7000206@att.com> In-Reply-To: <4BBB8AA7.7000206@att.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.68000000000000005 Cc: XML Developer List Subject: Re: [xml2rfc-dev] next up for xml2rfc.tcl X-BeenThere: xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about particulars of xml2rfc development and code." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 19:59:05 -0000 On 06.04.2010 21:25, Tony Hansen wrote: > I think the next step up for xml2rfc that we discussed will be to get > the RFC boilerplate up to snuff. > > Alice, Julian, do you have a handle on what's left to do for that? See , which also has a partial patch. rfc2629.xslt already has the code, and illustrates the expected results. Best regards, Julian From tony@att.com Fri Apr 9 19:04:09 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc-dev@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc-dev@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F2553A68AB for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 19:04:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.181 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.181 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.418, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fk-FboqOJDIS for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 19:04:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail120.messagelabs.com (mail120.messagelabs.com [216.82.250.83]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4DE03A6876 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 19:04:07 -0700 (PDT) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: tony@att.com X-Msg-Ref: server-15.tower-120.messagelabs.com!1270865041!25871906!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.4; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [144.160.20.146] Received: (qmail 5817 invoked from network); 10 Apr 2010 02:04:02 -0000 Received: from sbcsmtp7.sbc.com (HELO mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) (144.160.20.146) by server-15.tower-120.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 10 Apr 2010 02:04:02 -0000 Received: from enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o3A23l8q028337 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 22:03:47 -0400 Received: from klpd017.kcdc.att.com (klpd017.kcdc.att.com [135.188.40.86]) by mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o3A23ekP028297 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 22:03:40 -0400 Received: from kcdc.att.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by klpd017.kcdc.att.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o3A23rtH019445 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 21:03:53 -0500 Received: from maillennium.att.com (mailgw1.maillennium.att.com [135.25.114.99]) by klpd017.kcdc.att.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o3A23lsC019362 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 21:03:47 -0500 Received: from [135.70.3.106] (vpn-135-70-3-106.vpn.west.att.com[135.70.3.106]) by maillennium.att.com (mailgw1) with ESMTP id <20100410020346gw100b8i7pe> (Authid: tony); Sat, 10 Apr 2010 02:03:46 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [135.70.3.106] Message-ID: <4BBFDC81.7050409@att.com> Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 22:03:45 -0400 From: Tony Hansen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: XML Developer List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [xml2rfc-dev] proposal for updated xml2rfc index.html/experimental.html X-BeenThere: xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about particulars of xml2rfc development and code." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 02:04:09 -0000 I've been playing around with the woring on index.html and experimental.html. I *) added John's text from the thread occurring on the wgchairs mailing list regarding ipr values *) moved the blocks around a bit to make the link and web form more prominent *) made the fonts more consistent between the pages Henrik, I was going to say to take a look at the raw5.tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc web site, but it looks like the post-commit hook is still not working to populate that area. So, in the meantime, please take a look at merlot.tools.ietf.org/~tonyh/xml2rfc/index.html merlot.tools.ietf.org/~tonyh/xml2rfc/experimental.html and provide comments. Tony From ahagens@amsl.com Tue Apr 13 16:25:05 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xml2rfc-dev@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: xml2rfc-dev@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A1823A6900 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:25:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id draFMt6kxqaa for ; Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:25:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (mail.amsl.com [64.170.98.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE14B3A6921 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:25:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c1a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C249E0964; Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:24:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c1a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c1a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3TxJhE-GXXOF; Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:24:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc2.home (pool-173-73-54-24.washdc.fios.verizon.net [173.73.54.24]) by c1a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A9667E08F9; Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:24:56 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-10-836119532 From: Alice Hagens In-Reply-To: <4BBB927C.2010406@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 19:24:55 -0400 Message-Id: References: <4BBB8AA7.7000206@att.com> <4BBB927C.2010406@gmx.de> To: Tony Hansen X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Cc: XML Developer List , RFC Editor Subject: Re: [xml2rfc-dev] next up for xml2rfc.tcl X-BeenThere: xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about particulars of xml2rfc development and code." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 23:25:05 -0000 --Apple-Mail-10-836119532 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi Tony, >> Alice, Julian, do you have a handle on what's left to do for that? >=20 > See , which = also has a partial patch. Need more details for this one? For background, here's the thread when = Julian sent out proposed DTD changes to generate the new header and = Status of This Memo text, and I sent a couple comments.=20 = http://lists.xml.resource.org/pipermail/xml2rfc/2009-December/003807.html = http://lists.xml.resource.org/pipermail/xml2rfc/2009-December/003808.html = http://lists.xml.resource.org/pipermail/xml2rfc/2009-December/003809.html Julian wrote: > illustrates the = expected results. Additionally, this page shows the SoTM possibilities (Sandy and Julian = iterated on this, so I believe the 2 are in sync): http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/status-memos.txt Example use cases: 1) For "IETF Standards Track w/ consensus": Could be as simple as: Or if we were to be explicit about the defaults: 2) For "IRTF Informational w/ RG consensus": ... Internet Congestion Control Research Group 3) For "IAB Informational" 4) For "Independent Submission Informational" Please let me know if I can provide more information. Thanks, Alice On Apr 6, 2010, at 3:58 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 06.04.2010 21:25, Tony Hansen wrote: >> I think the next step up for xml2rfc that we discussed will be to get >> the RFC boilerplate up to snuff. >>=20 >> Alice, Julian, do you have a handle on what's left to do for that? >=20 > See , which = also has a partial patch. >=20 > rfc2629.xslt already has the code, and = illustrates the = expected results. >=20 > Best regards, Julian > _______________________________________________ > xml2rfc-dev mailing list > xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc-dev >=20 --Apple-Mail-10-836119532 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Alice, Julian, do you have = a handle on what's left to do for that?

See <http://tra= c.tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc/trac/ticket/6>, which also has a = partial patch.

Need more = details for this one?  For background, here's the thread = when Julian sent out proposed DTD changes to generate the new = header and Status of This Memo text, and I sent a couple = comments. 


Julian = wrote:
<http://tools.ietf= .org/html/draft-reschke-hab-06> illustrates the expected = results.

Additionally, = this page shows the SoTM possibilities (Sandy and Julian iterated on = this, so I believe the 2 are in sync):

Example use cases:

1) For "IETF Standards Track w/ = consensus":
Could be as simple = as:
<rfc = number=3D"XXXX" category=3D"std">
Or if we were = to be explicit about the defaults:
<rfc number=3D"XXXX" category=3D"std" = consensus=3D"yes" = submissionType=3D"IETF">

2) For = "IRTF Informational w/ RG = consensus":
<rfc number=3D"XXXX" category=3D"info" = consensus=3D"yes" = submissionType=3D"IRTF">
...
<workgroup&g= t;Internet Congestion Control Research = Group</workgroup>

3) For "IAB = Informational"
<rfc number=3D"XXXX" category=3D"info" = submissionType=3D"IAB">

4) For = "Independent Submission = Informational"
<rfc number=3D"XXXX" category=3D"info" = submissionType=3D"independent">

Please = let me know if I can provide more = information.

Thanks,
Alice

On Apr 6, 2010, at 3:58 PM, Julian Reschke = wrote:

On 06.04.2010 21:25, Tony Hansen = wrote:
I think the next step up for xml2rfc = that we discussed will be to get
the RFC boilerplate up to = snuff.

Alice, Julian, = do you have a handle on what's left to do for = that?

See <http://tra= c.tools.ietf.org/tools/xml2rfc/trac/ticket/6>, which also has a = partial patch.

rfc2629.xslt already has the code, and <http://tools.ietf= .org/html/draft-reschke-hab-06> illustrates the expected = results.

Best regards, = Julian
_______________________________________________
xml2rfc-dev = mailing list
xml2rfc-dev@ietf.org
https://w= ww.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xml2rfc-dev

<= br>= --Apple-Mail-10-836119532--