Fwd: [Bug 190] New: HTTP examples using RFC2629 markup

I'm in favour of this change, and were you to supply me with a diff, it  
would happen all the sooner.  Thanks !

Lisa

Begin forwarded message:

> Resent-From: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> From: bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu
> Date: November 21, 2005 7:19:04 AM PST
> To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> Subject: [Bug 190] New: HTTP examples using RFC2629 markup
>
>
> http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190
>
>            Summary: HTTP examples using RFC2629 markup
>            Product: WebDAV-RFC2518-bis
>            Version: -08
>           Platform: Other
>         OS/Version: other
>             Status: NEW
>           Severity: enhancement
>           Priority: P2
>          Component: Other
>         AssignedTo: joe-bugzilla@cursive.net
>         ReportedBy: julian.reschke@greenbytes.de
>          QAContact: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
>
>
> Currently the spec puts all (or most) HTTP request/response examples  
> into a
> single RCF2629 artwork element. This has several disadvantages:
>
> - xm2rfc processors will not be aware that the whitespace between  
> request and
> response is a good place for a page break
>
> - automatic XML checks in artwork fail (see
> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2629xslt/ 
> rfc2629xslt.html#rfc.section.3.3>,
> "parse-xml-in-artwork")
>
> Also, putting the strings ">>> Request" and ">>> Response" into the  
> figure
> preambles will make it easier to read in non-plain-ASCII versions of  
> the spec
> (yes, this is cosmetic).
>
> Should we have consensus for this change, I'm volunteering to make it.
>
>
>
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
>