Subject: [Tools-discuss] Undefined targets in XML output

From: Julien ÉLIE <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 23:28:04 +0200

Hi,

I have just submitted a new Internet-Draft, and I see that references to 
other RFCs appear as "Undefined target: RFCxxxx" in the XML output:
     https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-murchison-nntp-compress-03.xml

Are you already aware of the problem?  Will it be fixed (and the XML 
pages already submitted fixed)?

Thanks,

-- 
Julien ÉLIE

« Pourvu que ça dure ! » (Letizia Bonaparte)

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 23:48:57 +0200

Try Firefox (your XML is not accepted at all; maybe try using character
references).

But the problem you seem to have with references is that you coded them
using cross-origin entity references.  The XML processors in browsers
typically don't do those.  (This is one of the reasons kramdown-rfc has
a "standalone mode". http://slides.rfc.space for more)

You can prepare your XML input for submission by a command like:

xml2rfc draft-a-b-c-revisable.xml -o draft-a-b-c-submittable.xml --exp

Grüße, Carsten

---

From: Julien ÉLIE <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 22:28:50 +0200

Hi Carsten,

> Try Firefox (your XML is not accepted at all; maybe try using character

I have just tried with Firefox, and indeed I see that only a few HTML 
entities are defined in rfc2629.dtd: "&amp;", "&lt;", "&gt;", "&apos;", 
"&quot;", "&nbsp;", and "&nbhy;".

> xml2rfc draft-a-b-c-revisable.xml -o draft-a-b-c-submittable.xml --exp

OK, thanks for the pointer.
It appears that I am using an old version of xml2rfc (in Tcl).  It does 
not know "--exp".  I'll upgrade to the current xml2rfc version in Python.

Thanks again!

-- 
Julien ÉLIE

« Contra factum non datur argumentum. »

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 08:02:02 +0200

> "&quot;", "&nbsp;", and "&nbhy;".

Even the DTD isn't read by browsers. "&amp;", "&lt;", "&gt;", "&apos;", 
"&quot;" are predefined anyway. Other entities can be defined in-line, 
as that: 
<https://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc7749.html#special.unicode.code.points>.

> not know "--exp".  I'll upgrade to the current xml2rfc version in Python.

FWIW, the TCL version has this feature as well. Just supply two 
filenames with "xml" extension.

Best regards, Julian

---

From: Julien ÉLIE <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 23:01:15 +0200

Hi Julian,

> filenames with "xml" extension.

Oh, I did not notice.  Thanks for the information.
I have just released a new version of the draft, with inline XML 
references and character references instead of HTML entities.  It works 
fine.  Thanks again for your help, Carsten and you.

On a side note, I notice that the XML rendering and the HTML rendering 
differ in Section 4.  When using <artwork type="abnf">, the HTML version 
adds a yellow background, contrary to the XML version.
I do not know whether it is the expected result, so I just mention it in 
case it is an issue to fix in the tools.

Have a nice week-end,

-- 
Julien ÉLIE

« Pour célébrer ce jour heureux, buvons un coup, buvons-en deux. »
   (Aristophane)

---

From: Julien ÉLIE <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 23:20:43 +0200

> case it is an issue to fix in the tools.

Related links:
   https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-murchison-nntp-compress-04.xml
   https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-murchison-nntp-compress-04.html

Incidentally, when submitting a draft, checks for ID nits are run. 
Couldn't they be the same as the ones done by a click on "[Nits]" that 
runs idnits?
I ask because when submitting the draft, I did not see any nits.  But 
idnits says that I am wrongly using a "MAY NOT" (not defined in RFC 
2119).  It would have been better to give that nit before actually 
sending the draft!

Thanks,

-- 
Julien ÉLIE

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 23:50:13 +0200

> Couldn't they be the same as the ones done by a click on "[Nits]" that 

The submission-time idnits checks only cover the things that are
_required_ at submission time, which is a small subset of all the nits
checked.  The [Nits] link gives you the full idnits check.

> 2119).  It would have been better to give that nit before actually 

I guess I could change things to do two separate idnits runs, one
to determine if posting was allowed, and one to give feedback on nits
that should be fixed at some point.  Noted.

Best regards,

	Henrik

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 09:40:56 +0200

> case it is an issue to fix in the tools.

That's because the XML display is done using an entirely different piece 
of software (rfc2629.xslt, see 
<https://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2629xslt/rfc2629xslt.html>).

Best regards, Julian