Subject: Editing rfc2518bis.xml

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 12:17:51 +0200

Hi Lisa,

could you please make sure that the file on ietf.webdav.org is indeed 
well-formed XML? It currently contains several non-ASCII characters that 
cause XML parsers to choke on it (a fixed version is at 
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-latest.xml>).

Best regards, Julian

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 13:07:15 +0200

> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-latest.xml>). 

I also just noted that conversion in "strict" mode (as currently 
configured) fails because artwork is too wide. Please either remove the 
PI for now, or fix the artwork xml2rfc is complaining about.

Best regards, Julian

---

From: Lisa Dusseault <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 08:35:35 -0700

According to Oxygen's well-formedness test, the version I synchronized  
to  
http://ietf.webdav.org/webdav/rfc2518bis/draft-ietf-webdav- 
rfc2518bis.xml (and the version I pulled back down again) is  
well-formed.  It also goes through the utility at xml.resource.org just  
fine.

I tried to diff the xml file downloaded from my URL vs. the one from  
yours and unfortunately the diff is garbage, showing every line  
different.  It's probably something stupid like line returns, but it's  
a pain in the ass figuring out what's actually changed.   If you  
provide a diff I'll check it out further.

Lisa

On Oct 16, 2005, at 3:17 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> well-formed XML? It currently contains several non-ASCII characters  
> that cause XML parsers to choke on it (a fixed version is at

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:51:05 +0200

Lisa Dusseault wrote:
> to  http://ietf.webdav.org/webdav/rfc2518bis/draft-ietf-webdav- 

xml2rfc doesn't use a proper XML parser. I don't know about the other 
one you tried, but the document contains non-ASCII characters which 
aren't UTF-8 encoded, thus proper XML parsers reject the document 
because of encoding problems.

> provide a diff I'll check it out further.

Just check for non-ASCII characters.

Best regards, Julian

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 18:29:13 +0200

Julian Reschke wrote:

>> different.  It's probably something stupid like line returns, but 
>> it's  a pain in the ass figuring out what's actually changed.   If 
>> you  provide a diff I'll check it out further.
> 
> 

For instance:

 > xsltproc rfc2629.xslt draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-latest.xml
draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-latest.xml:1014: error: Input is not proper 
UTF-8, indicate encoding !
    because it is acting with principal A¡s credential, is allowed to
                                         ^
draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-latest.xml:1014: error: Bytes: 0xA1 0x73 
0x20 0x63
    because it is acting with principal A¡s credential, is allowed to
                                         ^
unable to parse draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-latest.xml

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 13:02:19 +0200

OK,

> I tried to diff the xml file downloaded from my URL vs. the one from  yours and unfortunately the diff is garbage, showing every line  different.  It's probably something stupid like line returns, but it's  a pain in the ass figuring out what's actually changed.   If you  provide a diff I'll check it out further. 

attached is a patch for the file that was on 
<http://ietf.webdav.org/webdav/rfc2518bis> as of today.

Best regards, Julian

1a2
> <?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?>
22c23
< <rfc ipr="full3978" docName="draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-07">
---
> <rfc ipr="full3978" docName="draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-latest">
43c44
< <date month="July" year="2005" />
---
> <date month="October" year="2005" />
1014c1015
<    because it is acting with principal A¡s credential, is allowed to 
---
>    because it is acting with principal A's credential, is allowed to 
1358c1359
<    If a server allows resource names to include characters that aren¡t 
---
>    If a server allows resource names to include characters that aren't 
2392c2393
<    412 (Precondition Failed) ¤ A condition failed, e.g. the Overwrite 
---
>    412 (Precondition Failed) - A condition failed, e.g. the Overwrite 
3582c3583
<    full URIs aren¡t used in other headers. WebDAV specifies full URLs 
---
>    full URIs aren't used in other headers. WebDAV specifies full URLs 
4395c4396
<             not cause a resource¡s ETag to change.  </t>
---
>             not cause a resource's ETag to change.  </t>
4458,4459c4459,4460
<             ‰activelock¡ elements.  If there is one or more lock, an 
<             ‰activelock¡ element appears for each lock on the resource.</t>  
---
>             "activelock" elements.  If there is one or more lock, an 
>             "activelock" element appears for each lock on the resource.</t>

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 20:59:12 +0200

> <http://ietf.webdav.org/webdav/rfc2518bis> as of today.

Lisa,

any chance you could fix the draft, so that it parses? Once that's done 
I can set up something that generates and publishes the HTML version, 
plus diffs to RFC2518.

Best regards, Julian

---

From: Lisa Dusseault <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 17:38:21 -0700

Ok, I've fixed all the non-ASCII characters I was aware of.  I haven't 
found a very good way to ensure those don't sneak in again but I'm sure 
you'll alert me if they do.

Lisa

On Oct 22, 2005, at 11:59 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> any chance you could fix the draft, so that it parses? Once that's 
> done I can set up something that generates and publishes the HTML 
> version, plus diffs to RFC2518.
>
> Best regards, Julian

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:14:53 +0200

> you'll alert me if they do.

The way to check is to run it through a compliant XML parser. There 
really should be one on your system.

There are two other things that keep me from using this file:

- metadata should be updated so that people know they're not looking at 
draft -07 (docName attribute and date element)

- xml2rfc rejects the document because of the "strict" mode that is 
selected (because of artwork being too wide) -- please either fix the 
artwork, or relax the "strict" requirement for now.

Best regards, Julian
Index: draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-latest.xml
===================================================================
RCS file: /var/cvsroot/xml2rfc/draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-latest.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -r1.4 draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-latest.xml
2d1
< <?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?>
20a20
> <?rfc strict="yes"?>
22c22
< <rfc ipr="full3978" docName="draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-latest">
---
> <rfc ipr="full3978" docName="draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-07">
43c43
< <date month="October" year="2005" />
---
> <date month="July" year="2005" />

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 09:50:42 +0200

Julian Reschke wrote:
>> found a very good way to ensure those don't sneak in again but I'm 
>> sure you'll alert me if they do.
>>
>> Lisa
> 
> 

Lisa,

any chance that you could fix that? This is the one thing that stops me 
from auto-generating TXT, HTML and diffs on our web site.

Best regards, Julian

---

From: Lisa Dusseault <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:47:03 -0700

Let me know if the version I uploaded today fixes the "strict" mode 
thing, i'm not sure I understand the problem there as I've had no 
trouble having xml2rfc run on the document (the version on the 
xml.resource.org site is the one I use)

lisa

On Oct 28, 2005, at 12:50 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> Julian Reschke wrote:
>> Lisa Dusseault wrote:
>>>
>>> Ok, I've fixed all the non-ASCII characters I was aware of.  I 
>>> haven't found a very good way to ensure those don't sneak in again 
>>> but I'm sure you'll alert me if they do.
>>>
>>> Lisa
>> - metadata should be updated so that people know they're not looking 
>> at draft -07 (docName attribute and date element)
> any chance that you could fix that? This is the one thing that stops 
> me from auto-generating TXT, HTML and diffs on our web site.
>
> Best regards, Julian

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 21:02:31 +0200

> xml.resource.org site is the one I use)

The version I have stops processing when it's run in strict mode, and 
artwork is too wide (you may want to check out 
<http://xml.resource.org/experimental.html>).

Best regards, Julian

---

From: Jim Whitehead <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 14:47:10 -0700

Julian,

I'm unclear what changes Lisa needs to make at this point. Are there  
specific figures that are causing a problem?

Also, I don't think it's fair to ding Lisa for using the released  
version of xml2rfc, while you're using the unreleased head of the  
development tree.

- Jim

On Oct 28, 2005, at 12:02 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:

>
> Lisa Dusseault wrote:
>
>> Let me know if the version I uploaded today fixes the "strict"  
>> mode thing, i'm not sure I understand the problem there as I've  
>> had no trouble having xml2rfc run on the document (the version on  
>> the xml.resource.org site is the one I use)
>>
>
> The version I have stops processing when it's run in strict mode,  
> and artwork is too wide (you may want to check out <http:// 
> xml.resource.org/experimental.html>).
>
> Best regards, Julian
>

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 09:37:48 +0200

> specific figures that are causing a problem?

No, these have been fixed.

> version of xml2rfc, while you're using the unreleased head of the  

I'm not doing that. I was just stating that I if she uses the "strict" 
mode, figures need to fit into the 69 character limit, otherwise the 
conversion doesn't work over here (remember: it would be much simpler if 
Lisa would publish the TXT and HTML along with the XML; I was 
*volunteering* to do ths over here).

Best regards, Julian