Subject: [Tools-discuss] vCardXML in xml2rfc

From: Simon Perreault <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 08:07:37 -0500

Hi,

In the spirit of "eating our own dog food", I think that the next
xml2rfc should use vCardXML[1] for describing RFC authors. vCardXML is
currently a draft in the VCARDDAV working group. It is an XML
representation of the venerable vCard format, which is used just about
anywhere on the Internet for representing contact information.

Are changes to the xml2rfc format allowed?
Is this feasible?
Can I do anything to help?
Would it make anyone hate me and want to kill me? (e.g. RFC editor staff
probably have tools that work with the current format...)

Thanks,
Simon

[1] <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-vcarddav-vcardxml>
-- 
DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca
NAT64/DNS64 open-source        --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server               --> http://numb.viagenie.ca

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 14:28:09 +0100

> anywhere on the Internet for representing contact information.

That's an interesting thought.

> Are changes to the xml2rfc format allowed?

This sounds like "who's in charge for changes?" - that's something that 
came up in the context of the xml2rfc rewrite SoW, and I believe the 
answer is: the community.

> probably have tools that work with the current format...)

I think a good initial step would be to write a tool that takes 
xml2rfc+vcardxml and transforms it "down" to xml2rfc (similarly how I 
implement "my" extensions in rfc2629.xslt).

Best regards, Julian

---

From: Marc Blanchet <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 10:05:31 -0500

>> anywhere on the Internet for representing contact information.
...

> xml2rfc+vcardxml and transforms it "down" to xml2rfc

well, but then there will be no value for an author to do the vcardxml 
since the "native" format that would be floating around will be without.

instead, I would suggest to support both formats for the time being, 
something like:
<author format="vcardxml">
... vcardxml blob
</author>

obviously it would require changes to parsers. but since we are 
rewriting it as I understand, might be a good idea to include the 
support of our own standards in it.

Marc.

> (similarly how I

>
> Best regards, Julian
> _______________________________________________
> Tools-discuss mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss

-- 
=========
IPv6 book: Migrating to IPv6, Wiley. http://www.ipv6book.ca
Stun/Turn server for VoIP NAT-FW traversal: http://numb.viagenie.ca
DTN Implementation: http://postellation.viagenie.ca
NAT64-DNS64 Opensource: http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 17:10:18 +0100

> since the "native" format that would be floating around will be without.

That's why I said "initial" :-)

> <author format="vcardxml">

I would just allow

      <vcard xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:vcard-4.0">

*instead* of <author>.

Of course doing this properly with DTD validation will be tricky.

> support of our own standards in it.

On the other hand, you're getting close to opening a can of worms. There 
are *many* things that should be improved in the xml2rfc format, with 
<reference> being another important one. We're not going to get this out 
of the first rewrite, unless I'm missing something.

Also, relying on vcard XML may not be sufficient; for instance it 
doesn't provide abbreviated organization names, and would need to be 
extended once we allow localized author names in addition to US-ASCII 
transcriptions...

BR, Julian

---

From: Tony Hansen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 00:13:15 -0400

On 3/9/2011 8:28 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> ... I think that the next
>> currently a draft in the VCARDDAV working group. ...
>
> This sounds like "who's in charge for changes?" - that's something 
> that came up in the context of the xml2rfc rewrite SoW, and I believe 
> the answer is: the community.

Yes, this is a question that needs to be resolved. "the community" is 
the right answer, but we need to figure out where the proper venue is. 
We need to have a forum for suggesting additions and modifications to 
the DTD to meet those suggestions, as well as a mechanism for weighing 
which changes are worth doing and a way to get those changes rolled out 
into the tools and onto the web site.

 > <vcard xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:vcard-4.0">

Seems like a reasonable design choice.

 > Of course doing this properly with DTD validation will be tricky.

We need to engage some DTD experts. :-)

> implement "my" extensions in rfc2629.xslt).

Using xslt seems a reasonable way to do prototyping.

     Tony Hansen