Subject: [Tools-discuss] A datatracker discussion point

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 17:43:31 -0000

When we show a legacy copy of a draft (e.g., one that has expired or been
updated) we just show plain text, pdf, html, and bibtex even if the xml was
submitted.
For example
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-teas-pce-central-control-04.txt via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-teas-pce-central-control/04/
But https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-teas-pce-central-control-04.xml
*does* exist. Just that nothing conveniently points to it.

When we show the most recent version of an active draft we also show the xml (if
it was submitted).
For example, https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-farrel-sfc-convent-05.xml

When a draft becomes an RFC it is very hard to find the final version of the
draft because the page automagically goes to the RFC text.
For example,
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-teas-pce-central-control/05/
Now the RFC is not the final draft version and fortunately, we do hold the
archive TXT file.
For example
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-teas-pce-central-control-05.txt
exists. Just that nothing conveniently points to it.

Furthermore,
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-teas-pce-central-control-05.xml
*does* exist.

So, the questions...
1. Would it be helpful to include the pointer to the XML of old draft versions?
2. Would it be helpful to include a pointer to the TXT and XML of the final
version of a draft that has become an RFC?

Discuss :-)

Adrian

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 07:55:07 +1300

On 23/01/2018 06:43, Adrian Farrel wrote:
...> 1. Would it be helpful to include the pointer to the XML of old draft versions?
> version of a draft that has become an RFC?

Yes. (Although I always use the tools site for this anyway; but if all the
convenience features were also in the tracker, I wouldn't need to.)

    Brian