- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 15:11:21 +0200
- To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
- CC: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, rfc-interest <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>, spec-prod@w3.org
On 2012-05-09 14:57, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Julian Reschke<julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: >> On 2012-05-09 13:12, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: >>> >>> I note that as is often the case when the blatantly obvious is said we >>> have disagreement by unresolved reference. >>> >>> If you can't give a reason for a disagreement then you should probably >>> think a bit before posting and wait until you can state what the >>> disagreement is. >>> >>> We have two standards bodies here. What is the reason to NOT have a >>> common standard? >>> >>> >>> BTW the only 'tools' I needed to produce W3C docs was the bit of code >>> to rip out the style crud produced by Microsoft Word and another that >>> produced the index. >>> >>> I used the same tools to produce W3C and OASIS docs. >> >> >> ...which means: little metadata or no metadata to rely on, right? > > I am not sure quite what you mean there. A way to programatically extract all the information xml2rfc captures for us, such as author names, WG information, "updates"/"obsoletes" information, references, ABNF, copyright status, ... > One of the reasons I think support for metadata sucks in every tool in > existence is that they are all wysiwyg and metadata is something you > don't see by definition. Yes. One of the reasons I do not like WYSISYG tools. > What I want is a tool that supports an editing mode that is NEITHER > WYSIWYG or raw markup. I want to see my text in properly formatted > paragraphs that also disclose the semantic markup. > > So if I had transcluded some chunk o' boilerplate there would be some > sort of mark at the start saying<include:ipr2012> followed by the > transcluded text. So I could read the editing copy and see immediately > what is going on. > > I only want to see metadata that matters, not every<P> tag. > > > It would be really nice if there was a toolset out there that > generated and made use of a common set of metadata. But that has not > happened. > > For example, it should be possible to cut an paste a citation from one > document to another in such a way that tools are able to reformat it > to apply whatever deranged nonsense of a citation format is required > at the other end. I don't see that as existing. > > Pretty much every tool there is to manage citations sucks. I have > tried end note and it sucks because it is an afterthought. The > citation handling in Word is stovepiped to a few formats that are all > stupid and few other things bother at all. > > > It really should not be difficult, A 'database' of citations should > require no more than an HTML document with a list of citations. > > It should be possible to drop in a citation by just typing in > cite:rfc1234 or something similar. For xml2rfc, we are very close to that (at least for standard references). Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 9 May 2012 13:12:00 UTC